On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 at 23:33, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Meet Soni <meetsoni3017@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > - Remove legacy or obscure options that are no longer needed. > > Such as? > > > - Add improvements that wouldn't make sense to bolt onto legacy > > commands. > > Such as? > > While I agree that there may be cases that the above goals in > general would bring us improvements, I think neither of these two > applies to for-each-ref. People are using for-each-ref to iterate > over and enumerate refs already, and if you are to add some new > features to "git refs list", they certainly will demand these new > goodies to be added to for-each-ref as well. > > So, I dunno. To clarify, I don't have specific options or improvements in mind right now. The idea behind mentioning them was to acknowledge that having a consolidated interface like git refs might open the door to such discussions. The primary motivation here is to make ref-related commands discoverable at a single entry point - git refs, rather than scattered across several top-level commands. The aim is to improve disoverability and set the stage for potential future cleanup or enhancements, should the community find value in doing so. Per mentor suggestion, this RFC was meant to invite broader input on whether the community sees value in such a consolidation, and if so, what shape future refinements (if any) might take.
