"John Cai via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: John Cai <johncai86@xxxxxxxxx> > > At GitLab, we have a system that creates ephemeral internal refs that > don't live long before getting deleted. Having an option to exclude > certain refs from a packed-refs file allows these internal references to > be deleted much more efficiently. > > Add an --exclude option to the pack-refs builtin, and use the ref > exclusions API to exclude certain refs from being packed into the final > packed-refs file > > Signed-off-by: John Cai <johncai86@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/git-pack-refs.txt | 12 +++++++++++- > builtin/pack-refs.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- > refs.c | 4 ++-- > refs.h | 7 ++++++- > refs/debug.c | 4 ++-- > refs/files-backend.c | 16 ++++++++++------ > refs/packed-backend.c | 2 +- > refs/refs-internal.h | 3 ++- > revision.h | 2 +- > t/helper/test-ref-store.c | 3 ++- > t/t3210-pack-refs.sh | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 11 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) Nice. > diff --git a/Documentation/git-pack-refs.txt b/Documentation/git-pack-refs.txt > index e011e5fead3..c0f7426e519 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-pack-refs.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-pack-refs.txt > @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ git-pack-refs - Pack heads and tags for efficient repository access > SYNOPSIS > -------- > [verse] > -'git pack-refs' [--all] [--no-prune] > +'git pack-refs' [--all] [--no-prune] [--exclude <pattern>] > > DESCRIPTION > ----------- > @@ -60,6 +60,16 @@ interests. > The command usually removes loose refs under `$GIT_DIR/refs` > hierarchy after packing them. This option tells it not to. > > +--exclude <pattern>:: > + > +Do not pack refs matching the given `glob(7)` pattern. Repetitions of this option > +accumulate exclusion patterns. Use `--no-exclude` to clear and reset the list of > +patterns. If a ref is already packed, including it with `--exclude` will not > +unpack it. > + > +When used with `--all`, it will use the difference between the set of all refs, > +and what is provided to `--exclude`. > + Just one question. Does the above get formatted correctly, or does the lack of a line with a sole '+' on it between the paragraphs make the second paragraph look as if it is unrelated to the description of the "--exclude" option? Other than that I saw nothing surprising or unexpected in the patch. Looking good. Thanks.
