Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix prune/gc problem with multiple worktrees

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Fixing reachability via the index and detached HEADs feels relatively
> important.
> ...

I agree with the order of importance above.  But "relatively" is a
very good keyword.  Just like bisection refs, what is in the index
and the commit detached HEAD points at are expected to be tentative.
As a part of still-experimental feature, I'd rather see our
bandwidth spent on fixing it the right way first time, instead of
piling on an unproven quick-fix as a band aid, having to rip it off
and fixing it properly later.

> It's hard for me to predict when the ref-iterator stuff will be merged.
> It is a big change, but so far the feedback seems pretty good. I can
> tell you that pushing it and ref-stores forward is high on my priority list.

Thanks.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]