Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > It really makes me wonder if this "unknown type" stuff has any value > at all. You can create an object with any type using "hash-object > --literally -t". And you can ask about its type and size. But you can > never retrieve the object content! Nor can you pack it or transfer it, > since packs use a numeric type field. Correct. IIRC, the "--literally" support was mostly for debugging, and as you noticed, is very much limited because it can only create funny objects that are loose. And the debugging was not really about adding more object types, but was more about "what would our code do when we see an object that is corrupt whose type we do not recognise". I personally think the "--literally" should not survive the Git 3.0 boundary. Thanks.
