On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 09:59:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > As an aside, I wonder if we should consider deprecating and eventually > > dropping support for core.prefersymlinkrefs. I can't think of a reason > > anybody would want to use it, and of course it makes no sense as we move > > on to alternate backends like reftables. > > Yup. Perhaps add an entry or two to BreakingChanges document? > > Documentation/BreakingChanges.txt | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git c/Documentation/BreakingChanges.txt w/Documentation/BreakingChanges.txt > index 0532bfcf7f..2a85740f3c 100644 > --- c/Documentation/BreakingChanges.txt > +++ w/Documentation/BreakingChanges.txt > @@ -115,6 +115,12 @@ info/grafts as outdated, 2014-03-05) and will be removed. > + > Cf. <20140304174806.GA11561@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>. > > +* Support for core.prefersymlinkrefs will be dropped. Support for > + existing repositories that use symbolic links to represent a > + symbolic ref may or may not be dropped. > ++ > +Cf. <20240829040215.GA4054823@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > + > == Superseded features that will not be deprecated > > Some features have gained newer replacements that aim to improve the design in
