Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Basically, I am saying that this whole bundle concept is not thought > through, that it is too loosely defined, and that it will result in unmet > expectations sooner or later. (Which usually means sooner.) Earlier I thought you said that bundle had a clearly defined semantics, which I did not quite understand, but now you are agreeing with me... > So, either we have to rethink how to handle prerequisites (so that only > those are checked which are strictly necessary for _the one_ ref you are > updating), or we have to make it _very_ obvious to (human) users of > git-bundle that you should _not_ bundle two unrelated -- or only remotely > related -- refs into one bundle. I've been wondering if we can define prereqs per listed head. - 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