Jeff King writes:
>> The fixes make sense to me (I haven't carefully read the
>> implementation, but design/approach explained in the proposed log
>> messages are very sound), and I think 3/3 is a good thing to do,
>> too, in the new world order after d3038d2.
>
> I think it's rather the opposite
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:03:05AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > The reason is that since git d3038d2 (prune: keep objects reachable from
> > recent objects, 2014-10-15), we will traverse objects that are not
> > reachable but have recent mtimes (within the 2-week prune expiration
> > window).
Jeff King writes:
> Stefan noticed that running "git gc" with a recent version of git causes
> some useless complaints about missing objects.
>
> The reason is that since git d3038d2 (prune: keep objects reachable from
> recent objects, 2014-10-15), we will traverse objects that are not
> reachab
Stefan noticed that running "git gc" with a recent version of git causes
some useless complaints about missing objects.
The reason is that since git d3038d2 (prune: keep objects reachable from
recent objects, 2014-10-15), we will traverse objects that are not
reachable but have recent mtimes (with
4 matches
Mail list logo
