From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx> REF_IS_PRUNING is right below this comment, so it clearly does not belong in this comment. This was apparently introduced in commit 5ac95fee (Nov 5, 2017 "refs: tidy up and adjust visibility of the `ref_update` flags"). Signed-off-by: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@xxxxxxxxxx> --- refs/files-backend.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c index 151b0056fe5..5cfdec1e820 100644 --- a/refs/files-backend.c +++ b/refs/files-backend.c @@ -16,8 +16,7 @@ * This backend uses the following flags in `ref_update::flags` for * internal bookkeeping purposes. Their numerical values must not * conflict with REF_NO_DEREF, REF_FORCE_CREATE_REFLOG, REF_HAVE_NEW, - * REF_HAVE_OLD, or REF_IS_PRUNING, which are also stored in - * `ref_update::flags`. + * or REF_HAVE_OLD, which are also stored in `ref_update::flags`. */ /* -- gitgitgadget
