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 09:11:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20080613131108.GA15876@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20080611230344.GD19474@sigill.intra.peff.net> <6413041E-A64A-4BF4-9ECF-F7BFA5C1EAEF@wincent.com> <4851F6F4.8000503@op5.se> <20080613055800.GA26768@sigill.intra.peff.net> <48521EDA.5040802@op5.se> <20080613074257.GA513@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vtzfxwtt0.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <19C06D62-966A-4626-A620-2281A7CAA2B6@wincent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Andreas Ericsson , Eric Raible , Git Mailing List , Nicolas Pitre To: Wincent Colaiuta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 13 15:13:14 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 1K794a-0008Dr-K5 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:12:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755751AbYFMNLN (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:11:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755866AbYFMNLN (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:11:13 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:2740 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755735AbYFMNLN (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:11:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 24291 invoked by uid 111); 13 Jun 2008 13:11:10 -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 09:11:10 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:11:09 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19C06D62-966A-4626-A620-2281A7CAA2B6@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 02:40:50PM +0200, Wincent Colaiuta wrote: > Sounds a little bit over-engineered to me. > > So, "stash" is intended for short-term storage, but by adding a "keep" > option you're officially blessing it for long-term storage as well. And > the interface that you propose, explicitly marking stuff as "for keeps" > and being able to move stuff from "temp" to "keep" sounds quite > complicated. I agree. I like the expiration of stashes, but if it is a choice between "just don't expire them" and "here is a complex set of rules and obligations for preventing them from expiring" I think we are better off just leaving them. -Peff