Johannes Schindelin wrote: > No. I would never say that you have to run for-each-ref for each ref. > That's plain stupid. I went back and looked at the thread, and I had indeed misread the original message, which was from Jakub, not you. I think I got in the "this is surreal" mode as a result of that (invoking for-each-ref 250 times is bad enough, obviously.) > BTW I take some satisfaction in that you finally agreed (in another email) > that some post-creation caching is necessary. I don't believe I have ever disputed that (in fact, I have pushed very hard for gitweb to do post-creation caching.) > I would be even more satisfied if you finally agreed that it is a good > practice to separate conceptually different things, and not continued ad > infinitum (and ad nauseam) arguing that .git/info/refs should serve dumb > transports, and gitweb, and eventually bring peace to everybody on this > planet. I've already said I think it's an aesthetic argument, but I don't really care either way, as long as there is only one hook that updates all the caches. I don't want the user to have to juggle an arbitrary and increasing number of hooks. Fair? -hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Sun Jan 28 09:08:24 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-01-28 09:10:58 EST