On Tuesday, 9 December 2014, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I actually think filter-branch's "refs/original" is a bit outdated at
> this point. The information is there in the reflogs already, and
> dealing with refs/original often causes confusion in my experience. It
> could probably use a "git filter-branch --restore" or something to
> switch each $ref to $ref@{1} (after making sure that the reflog entry
> was from filter-branch, of course).
Yeah, I'd agree that refs/original can cause confusion.
> Not that I expect you to want to work on filter-branch. :) But maybe
> food for thought for a BFG feature.
I haven't heard much demand for a recover/restore feature on the BFG
(I think by the time people get to the BFG, they're pretty sure they
want to go ahead with the procedure!) but I'll bear it in mind. Mind
you, to make the post-rewrite clean-up easier, I'd be happy to
contribute a patch that gives 'gc' a flag to do the equivalent of:
git reflog expire --expire=now --all && git gc --prune=now --aggressive
Maybe:
git gc --purge
??
--
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