From 398da4f6ab00b2f0eb7240d2c718122eb2e466ac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Atemu Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 10:21:10 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- ...mment_2_9274223b32601ead9a508aa9852e4933._comment | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/__96__git_annex_info__96___hangs_with_git_special_remote/comment_2_9274223b32601ead9a508aa9852e4933._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/__96__git_annex_info__96___hangs_with_git_special_remote/comment_2_9274223b32601ead9a508aa9852e4933._comment b/doc/bugs/__96__git_annex_info__96___hangs_with_git_special_remote/comment_2_9274223b32601ead9a508aa9852e4933._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..2724e16158 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/__96__git_annex_info__96___hangs_with_git_special_remote/comment_2_9274223b32601ead9a508aa9852e4933._comment @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="Atemu" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/86b8c2d893dfdf2146e1bbb8ac4165fb" + subject="comment 2" + date="2023-12-01T10:21:09Z" + content=""" +I've had an idea on this: Why not only update UUIDs on (manual) sync/fetch? + +This would be in line with how git interacts with regular remotes otherwise too; always requiring an explicit fetch to update its info. + +To me it just violates the principle of least surprise to have git-annex try and reach remotes when running something as simple as `info`. +"""]] -- 2.30.2