From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@horizon.com Subject: Re: killing a branch Date: 12 Jan 2006 04:57:02 -0500 Message-ID: <20060112095702.29064.qmail@science.horizon.com> X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 12 10:57:37 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EwzCn-0007kj-3u for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:57:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030336AbWALJ5O (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:57:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030341AbWALJ5O (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:57:14 -0500 Received: from science.horizon.com ([192.35.100.1]:46650 "HELO science.horizon.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1030336AbWALJ5N (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 04:57:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 29065 invoked by uid 1000); 12 Jan 2006 04:57:02 -0500 To: git@vger.kernel.org Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Note that "git prune" could be sped up ENORMOUSLY if git-fsck-cache could be taught to (optionally) not open, uncompress, hash, and verify any blob objects. Just assume that they're okay. I had a look at the code briefly, but it was a little bit hairier (a more invasive change) than I felt like dealing with.