On 01/23/2014 06:28 PM, Jeff King wrote:
I think your understanding is accurate here. So we want repack to
respect keep files for deletion, but we _not_ necessarily want
pack-objects to avoid packing an object just because it's in a pack
marked by .keep (see my other email).
Yes, that makes sen
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 03:53:28PM -0800, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
> On 01/23/2014 03:45 PM, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
> >
> >The worry is less certain objects not being packed and more the old
> >packs being deleted by git repack, isn't it? From the man page for
> >git-index-pack:
>
> This should
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:56:17AM +0100, Vicent Martà wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
> > Yes, we'd prefer to do that too. How do you actually do this, though? I
> > don't see a way to pass `--honor-pack-keep` (shouldn't I pass in its
> > inverse?) down to `gi
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
> Yes, we'd prefer to do that too. How do you actually do this, though? I
> don't see a way to pass `--honor-pack-keep` (shouldn't I pass in its
> inverse?) down to `git-pack-objects`.
We run with this patch in production, it may be of us
On 01/23/2014 03:45 PM, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
The worry is less certain objects not being packed and more the old
packs being deleted by git repack, isn't it? From the man page for
git-index-pack:
This should probably be "new pack" and not "old packs", I guess. Not
knowing much about how
On 01/23/2014 02:52 PM, Jeff King wrote:
Right, that's expected.
The bitmap format cannot represent objects that are not present in the
pack. So we cannot write a bitmap index if any object reachable from a
packed commit is omitted from the pack.
We could be nicer and downgrade it to a warning,
6 matches
Mail list logo
