On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:47:50PM +1100, Bryan Turner wrote: > > There is a practical reason to care. Ref deletion will also delete the > > reflog, leaving no trace of the reachability. Whereas a non-fast-forward > > push could be resolved by looking in the reflog. > > A fair point. I had mistakenly thought that reflogs would survive the > ref's deletion and be "pruned" as part of garbage collection, but a > quick test shows that, as I'm sure you already know, that's not true. I wish it worked that way. Unfortunately there are complications with keeping the old reflogs in place, because they sometimes cause conflicts with new refs being created (e.g., a reflog in ".git/logs/refs/heads/foo" would prevent ".git/logs/refs/heads/foo/bar" from being created). I had some patches long ago to try to keep a "reflog graveyard" around, but they were quite invasive, and there were some corner cases that caused weird errors. Handling this sort of D/F conflict more gracefully is one of the things I'd like to experiment with once we have pluggable ref backends (I think we'll also disallow "foo/bar" if "foo" exists, but the storage could at least keep the reflogs around). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html