Chris Torek <chris.torek@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > For these reasons, I'd suggest that the all-zero hash be officially > deprecated in favor of create/delete and of course create-symref > and delete-symref. Of course, compatibility requires some sort > of support for the old system for some time. As to whether that > means something like the suggestion of ".missing" etc, I have no > particular opinion -- but since the symref options are new, they > would not *need* symmetric options, if we just say that "update-symref" > cannot create or delete a symref. I love that simplicity. > If this (deleting the target of the symref when using "delete") > is a bug, and I think it is, that's a separate topic of course... "git blame" may find those who can give us answers, but my gut feeling is that they weren't thinking too deeply about what should happen, and the code does what it happens to do. When you update, you'd want the update go through a symref (i.e., update-ref HEAD would update your current branch unless you are detached), so they must have been aware of the fact that they need to deal with symrefs. But when you delete a symref, what do you want that deletion affect? I do not have a good answer offhand, and they probably didn't even think of the need to deal with symrefs, as the most common symref you see, HEAD, is not something you'd ever want to delete anyway.
