On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 07:08:02AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 10:18:34AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > It may be useful for fsck to detect this, though, even if the default > > > message severity is set to "info" or even "ignore. That would allow > > > people who know they are using modern Git to increase it themselves (I > > > don't expect normal users to do this, but it would probably be useful > > > for forges which run automated "fsck" across a lot of repos). > > > > > > And then the backwards-incompatible Git 3.0 thing would just be tweaking > > > the severity of the config (and in the meantime, it would help flush out > > > any unexpected instances people run into). > > > > I came to make a same comment but the above has everything I wanted > > to say (and more). > > Yup, agreed, that sounds like a reasonable approach indeed. > Agree, I will use a "info" to report an empty "packed-refs" file. Thank everyone. > Patrick Jialuo
