Björn Steinbrink wrote: > On 2008.11.13 18:53:29 -0600, Brandon Casey wrote: >> Björn Steinbrink wrote: >>> I didn't check all the (proposed) commits for that branch, so just let >>> me know if I'm missing anything, but doesn't this change mean that you >>> just lose what "-ad" did? >> yes. >> >>> We have: >>> -a Create a new pack, containing all reachable objects >>> -A Same as -a >>> -ad Same as -a, and drop all old packs and loose objects >> by loose objects, I assume you mean packed unreachable objects. > > No, actually I just totally ignored the fact that -a of course already > deletes the loose objects. Actually, I had forgotten that repack deletes any loose objects at all. It does call prune-packed, but only when -d is used. > IMHO, "git gc" already provides enough safety. I tend to see "gc" as the > regular "just use it" tool, while repack gives me more control over how > I want things to be done, without forcing me to use the real plumbing or > to fumble around with the configuration for gc. And when I want control, > I'm generally prepared to shoot myself in the foot. I think you're right. Thanks for providing an example of a real use case. -brandon -- 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
