Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I'm tempted to say that the symref-reading code should > actually complain about following something outside of "refs/", but that > carries an even higher possibility of breaking somebody. But it seems > like we should be consistent between what we allow to be read, and what > we allow to be written. > > At any rate, with the code as you have it above, I think the "make sure > HEAD starts with refs/" code is now redundant. Isn't the rule these days "HEAD must be either detached or point into refs/heads/"? I thought "checkout" ensures that, and I am tempted to think that "symbolic-ref" that works on HEAD should be consistent with "checkout". So "make sure HEAD is within refs/" would certainly be "not wrong per-se" but not sufficiently tight, I suspect.
