A Large Angry SCM wrote:
>Stephen R. van den Berg wrote:
>>Jakub Narebski wrote:
>>>Stephen R. van den Berg wrote:
>>>>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.
>>>Well, IIRC the need for this was one of the causes of "death" of 'prior'
>>>header link proposal...
>>As I understood it, one of the causes of death of the "prior" link
>>proposal was that it was unclear if it pulled in the linked-to commits
>>upon fetch. In the "origin" case, the default is *not* to fetch them.
>And that's WRONG. Both prior and origin must fetch them if they're
>reference in the header.
By definition of the origin headerfield that is not wrong, there are no
other rules. But the point is moot at the moment, since I'm going to
create a proof of concept which puts the field in the free-form trailer.
--
Sincerely,
Stephen R. van den Berg.
"Father's Day: Nine months before Mother's Day."
--
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
