On 06/08/2015 04:27 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On 2015-06-08 08:40, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>> Previously, if a reflog entry's old or new SHA-1 was not resolvable
>> to an object, that SHA-1 was silently ignored. Instead, report such
>> cases as errors.
>
> I like the idea, but I am a bit uncertain whether it would constitute
> "too backwards-incompatible" a change to make this an error. I think
> it could be argued both ways: it *is* an improvement, but it could
> also possibly disrupt scripts that work pretty nicely at the moment.
What kind of script are you worried about? One that mucks around inside
the object database / reflog files? If people do that, all bets are off,
no? Plus,
* This change only causes fsck to output an extra line (and exit with
a a non-zero retcode).
* Repair is only a
git reflog expire --expire-unreachable=now --all
away, I think.
> [...]
Michael
--
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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