On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > >On Thu, 11 Sep 2008, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: > >> Not quite. Obviously all parents of p and p^ will continue to exist. > >> I.e. deleting branch B will cause all commits from p till the tip of B > >> (except p itself) to vanish. Keeping p implies that the whole chain of > >> parents below p will continue to exist and be reachable. That's the way > >> a git repository works. > > >And that's what I called stupid in my earlier reply to you. Either you > >have proper branches or tags keeping P around, or deleting B brings > >everything not reachable through other branches or tags (or reflog) > >away too. Otherwise there is no point making a dangling origin link > >valid. > > Well, the principle of least surprise dictates that they should be kept > by gc as described above, however... > I can envision an option to gc say "--drop-weak-links" which does > exactly what you describe. Don't you think this starts to look silly at that point? Nicolas -- 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
