"Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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"). Thanks for carefully reading and correcting. > > 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`. > */ > > /*
