On Sunday 15 June 2008, Jeff King wrote: > On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 04:06:16PM +0200, Johan Herland wrote: > > + pack_refs(PACK_REFS_ALL); > > I haven't looked carefully at the pack_refs code, but my understanding > was that this would pack _all_ refs, including branches. Don't we > generally try to leave branches unpacked, since they change a lot? IOW, > shouldn't this just be "pack_refs(0)"? Yes, for many repos it does not make much sense to pack branches. But in the case where the repo has many inactive branches (I have repos with 1000 branches where at most 5-10 are still active), I'd much rather pack all branches and then later "unpack" the active ones, than write all those "loose" refs as separate files onto the filesystem (e.g. in CygWin *shudder*). In any case, the user normally does not work actively on hundreds of branches, so the overhead of "unpacking" active branches should be fairly negligible in any case. ...Johan -- Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> www.herland.net -- 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
