From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: "on for all" configuration of notes.rewriteRef Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:29:17 +0200 Message-ID: <201109072329.18338.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <20110907212310.GH13364@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , "John S. Urban\"" , Tor Arntsen , knittl , Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 07 23:29:29 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R1PgW-0001Ly-NA for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 23:29:29 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757134Ab1IGV3X (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2011 17:29:23 -0400 Received: from edge20.ethz.ch ([82.130.99.26]:8402 "EHLO edge20.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757076Ab1IGV3W (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2011 17:29:22 -0400 Received: from CAS20.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.110) by edge20.ethz.ch (82.130.99.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:29:17 +0200 Received: from thomas.inf.ethz.ch (129.132.209.196) by CAS20.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.110) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:29:18 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.0.3-41-desktop; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20110907212310.GH13364@sigill.intra.peff.net> X-Originating-IP: [129.132.209.196] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King wrote: > On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 10:27:04PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: > > > Users had problems finding a working setting for notes.rewriteRef. > > Document how to enable rewriting for all notes. > > Hmm. Is this a safe thing to recommend? > > I think the idea of storing something like generation numbers in > git-notes is dead at this point, but it would be quite disastrous to > have generation numbers copied to rebased commits. Ditto for something > like a patch-id cache. Should these sorts of immutable cache notes, if > and when they do come about, go into a separate hierarchy? Admittedly I never considered the problem of supposedly-immutable notes here. The whole point was to help users who had no idea that the string put there should probably start with refs/notes/. So maybe the patch should instead say something along the lines of, to enable rewriting for the notes ref called foo, put refs/notes/foo -- which to a core gitter of course sounds extremely redundant. But what about the general issue of users who *have* put refs/notes/*, and then some software comes along that does not expect them to be rewritten? Do we declare the software broken, or discourage from such blanket rewriting? -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch