Björn Steinbrink wrote:
quoted text
> 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.

quoted text
> 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@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html