From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gc: call "prune --expire 2.weeks.ago" by default Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:07:23 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <7vskywadum.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <47D8193B.901@nrlssc.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Brandon Casey , Nicolas Pitre , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 12 20:08:57 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 1JZWIv-0003de-3G for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:07:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751744AbYCLTHT (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:07:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751710AbYCLTHS (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:07:18 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:35165 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751701AbYCLTHR (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:07:17 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2008 19:07:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp009) with SMTP; 12 Mar 2008 20:07:15 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19zdfFFXnlzJQEjAkvaU/hgIo+hSTBx4p1Xq0c1LB HKG4gp93t8RNtV X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Brandon Casey writes: > > > Is 'git-gc --prune' still useful to end users when those in-the-know > > can use git-prune when they really want all loose unreferenced objects > > to be removed? > > It is one command less to remember (just like with "git tag --verify" > and "git verify-tag"), so I'm all for "git gc --prune" to remain. I don't care one way or the other. > > Also, what about clones created with --shared or --reference? Should > > there be a way to disable this functionality? gc.pruneExpire never > > That would be nice. Okay, so I just remove the !approxidate() check. Then, "gc.pruneExpire = never" should work as you expect it to. Ciao, Dscho