From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C761CC433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:23:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8089164EE5 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:23:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233701AbhBJUWa (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:22:30 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:61157 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233567AbhBJUVj (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:21:39 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB8E105CC2; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:20:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=U5jVq7Hfla1yC9NcBA50FsufXUE=; b=qI8ZTQ gGwa1gG2Izx26CYZeT/nv+KXf2Npp77tnMZDzUQxiZPgNd8Y7C6rlu2xI4IL3xvZ 5JvUh/IknUkd5gE1d5tXzAbOlZ/LS+RzLQPZ/9YzdHKVZuEzn2mGaMMWeXvpsTUo FcxNNtWrT3+RtGPKtJniCIgfIKRGRffhGgkno= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=sxZ+ShNg3fiOsqncOPS+IHUzyI0sgo8D zD5qdNU97Gg2yJvvyESiB4a6++er7OMkSx44lG2wfoaGQ4EoQB+6IkUuTuyePNl4 Obe5sJSnvsgg1ZUOUsB3CUrmpQ5x0XvJ2OhdiDJs4yK9gJemnj4ASUYJaIMlpC/1 DVMI5A5/+44= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44BE0105CC1; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:20:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBAF1105CC0; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 15:20:46 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Martin von Zweigbergk Cc: git Subject: Re: GC can lose objects pointed to only by notes? References: Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 12:20:45 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Martin von Zweigbergk's message of "Wed, 10 Feb 2021 09:51:16 -1000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 757A698E-6BDD-11EB-BD34-E43E2BB96649-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Martin von Zweigbergk writes: > From the "NOTES" section in `git help gc`: > "[...] it will keep [..] objects referenced by the index, > remote-tracking branches, notes saved by git notes under refs/notes/" > > I had interpreted that as saying that it will keep objects pointed to > by notes saved under refs/notes. The documentation needs updating. There is no reachability from the notes that point at an otherwise uninteresting objects that are not pointed at by real refs, so a note that talks about a commit that is pruned will become stale. It is the reason why we need the "git notes prune" subcommand. Thanks.