Re: Regarding "git log" on "git series" metadata

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> writes:

> We could, but if we (or one of the many third-party git implementations)
> miss a case, gitlinks+reachability may appear to work in many cases with
> dataloss afterward, while gitrefs will fail early and not appear
> functional.

I wonder what happens if we do not introduce the "gitref" but
instead change the behaviour of "gitlink" to imply an optional
reachability.  That is, when enumerating what is reachable in your
repository, if you see a gitlink and if you notice that you locally
have the target of that gitlink, you follow, but if you know you
lack it, you do not error out.  This may be making things too
complex to feasibily implement by simplify them ;-) and I see a few
immediate fallout that needs to be thought through (i.e. downsides)
and a few upsides, too.  I am feeling feverish and not thinking
straight, so I won't try to weigh pros-and-cons.  

This would definitely need protocol extension when transferring
objects across repositories.