On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 05:02:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > I think you just reiterated what I said in "we could instead", and I think > we are in agreement. > Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were proposing that if $D/refs didn't exist, then if alternates pointed at $D/objects, git would reject using it. But that makes no sense, which is why I didn't understand why you proposed it. (Turns out I misunderstood you. :-) > The arguments to make are "Junio is worrying too much; depending on the > other repository's ref is no worse than depending on the objects the other > repository uses, and here is a proof that it is not just 'not a big deal' > but 'no problem at all'", "I've polled the userbase and there is no > existing configuration that will be broken by this change", and "I have > this configuration that will be broken by above change, don't do it". So the only configuration I can think of that would be broken by this is where $D/refs exists, but is insane. (i.e., such that git fsck for $D would result in errors). That seems pretty unlikely... - Ted -- 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
