Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: >> A safer check may be to pack and then make it missing, I guess, but >> I do not know if the difference matters. > > Yeah, I considered that. The trouble is that we are relying on the > earlier setup that made the object go missing. We cannot pack the refs > in the setup step, because the earlier tests are checking the loose-ref > behavior. So we would have to actually restore the object, pack, and > then re-delete it.
Yes, "restore pack redelete" was what I had in mind when I wondered such a sequence of extra steps is worth and the difference between such an approach and an approach to use a hand-crafted packed-refs file matters. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
