On 4/23/08, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Avery Pennarun" <apenwarr@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > This question has come up at least once a week since I subscribed to > > the list. I can think of these solutions: > > > > - Add a note to the git-gc and/or git-repack man page about how hidden > > refs can impact the cleanup. > > > > - Add an option to make git-clone *not* hardlink stuff; its different > > behaviour for hardlinking vs. file:// seems to be very confusing. > > > > - Make git-gc give a warning when there are some objects that are only > > referenced via the reflog or refs/original. (I suspect this would > > trigger too often though.) > > > > - Give git-gc a "really, I'm serious" option that makes it ignore the > > reflog and refs/original. > > - Teach people that leftover cruft is nothing to worry about. I think any option that starts with "teach people" will not reduce FAQ traffic to the list :) But maybe we could remind people of this somewhere prominent. The git-filter-branch man page? That said, I think I know why people are concerned about the cruft: it's for the same reason I was when I first tried git-filter-branch to get rid of some gigantic files after importing from svn, to cut the size of a clone from >1GB to <100MB. It's impossible to see if I've succeeded or not unless I make an actual clone, and even *then* I was misled at first because making a local clone is clever and avoids doing any work. Avery -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
