>
> On Tue, Jan 26 2021, Jonathan Tan wrote:
>
> > +If the 'unborn' feature is advertised the following argument can be
> > +included in the client's request.
> > +
> > + unborn
> > + The server may send symrefs pointing to unborn branches in the form
> > + "unborn <refname> symref-target:<target>".
> > +
>
> "branches" as in things under refs/heads/*? What should happen if you
> send this for a refs/tags/* or refs/xyz/*? Maybe overly pedantic, but it
> seems we have no other explicit mention of refs/{heads,tags}/ in
> protocol-v2.txt before this[1].
>
> 1. Although as I've learned from another recent thread include-tag is
> magical for refs/tags/* only.
Thanks for spotting this. Right now the server sends anything, but the
client only uses the information if it is a branch. I think this is the
most flexible approach so I'll keep it this way and document it
explicitly.
