From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-gc: skip stashes when expiring reflogs Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:13:04 -0400 Message-ID: <20080613091304.GC4474@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20080611230344.GD19474@sigill.intra.peff.net> <6413041E-A64A-4BF4-9ECF-F7BFA5C1EAEF@wincent.com> <7vzlpqza0t.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <279b37b20806121335p90a6d40qb39b73f71dae990b@mail.gmail.com> <7vlk1az8aa.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <279b37b20806121436w4f09c8f7n1009ef2f77b66f87@mail.gmail.com> <0F87000C-B51E-45B8-A21D-1DA184BD603F@wincent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Eric Raible , Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List , Nicolas Pitre To: Wincent Colaiuta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 13 11:14:37 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K75MB-0007UP-IW for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:14:03 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755049AbYFMJNJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:13:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754327AbYFMJNI (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:13:08 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:2558 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754227AbYFMJNH (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:13:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 9008 invoked by uid 111); 13 Jun 2008 09:13:05 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:13:05 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:13:04 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0F87000C-B51E-45B8-A21D-1DA184BD603F@wincent.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:43:59AM +0200, Wincent Colaiuta wrote: > While this may be true for codebases which move forward quickly, what > about one which is basically finished and tends not to get touched in a > long time. A situation arises, you stash something, the phone rings, and > for whatever reason the stash gets forgotten and you don't revisit the > project at all for days, weeks, months. It wouldn't be nice to eventually > come back and discover that your in-progress work had been "garbage" > collected for you. I think this argues more for increasing the expiration period on reflogs, if your project moves very slowly. -Peff