On 2022-04-14 at 07:12:20, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > Aside from how we'd do renames with transactions, do you know about > clone.defaultRemoteName and --origin? Yes, I do know about that. However, in my case, the repository is cloned before I even get a chance to touch it, so these options have no effect. My dotfiles aren't even on the machine at that point. > There was a (small) thread as a follow-up to that "rename --progress" > patch at the time, did you spot/read that?: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/220302.865yow6u8a.gmgdl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Yeah, I remember reading it at the time. > More generally, probably: > > 1. Teach transactions about N operations on the same refname, which > they'll currently die on, renames are one case. > > 2. Be able to "hook in" to them, updating reflogs is one special-case, > but we have the same inherent issue with updating config in lockstep > with transactions. Yeah, that's one of the reasons I was thinking of implementing --no-reflogs: because in that case, the operation really is a create/delete operation and it doesn't require any additional logic in the transaction. My goal here is specifically not to rearchitect ref transactions and to implement a relatively simple solution. Your response is indicating to me that updating reflogs is going to be the former and not the latter. -- brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them) Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
