From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-gc: skip stashes when expiring reflogs Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:13:54 -0700 Message-ID: <7vzlpqza0t.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <5vuJsx6Kidj7e8EABk_d63dLAYuWF-S880RrJKu83cJo_ejU3VN-VA@cipher.nrlssc.navy.mil> <20080611213648.GA13362@glandium.org> <20080611230344.GD19474@sigill.intra.peff.net> <6413041E-A64A-4BF4-9ECF-F7BFA5C1EAEF@wincent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Eric Raible , Git Mailing List , Nicolas Pitre To: Wincent Colaiuta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jun 12 22:15:10 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 1K6tCC-0004pc-4R for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:14:56 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754472AbYFLUOF (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:14:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754533AbYFLUOE (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:14:04 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:41568 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753641AbYFLUOC (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:14:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B5072143; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:14:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A9E12142; Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:13:56 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <6413041E-A64A-4BF4-9ECF-F7BFA5C1EAEF@wincent.com> (Wincent Colaiuta's message of "Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:35:43 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 18BC5142-38BC-11DD-87D4-F9737025C2AA-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Wincent Colaiuta writes: > So yes, branches _are_ better and more appropriate for long term > storage than stashes, but even so I don't think it's right for us to > risk throwing away information that the user explicitly stashed and > expected Git to look after for them. Yes, but for a limited amount of time.