On 2 July 2011 12:00, Thomas Martitz <kugel_at_rockbox.org> wrote:
> Isn't it proper to delete branches when the work for them is done?

If they've been merged, you can delete the branch head but the commits
are still part of history as they are now attached to master via the
merge; you aren't actually deleting any content, just removing a
pointer you don't need.

These branches are from svn and were never merged, just submitted as a
normal commit, so if the branch head is deleted the commits on those
branches will disappear and that part of history will be lost. It may
well not be any great loss, but the cost of keeping them is tiny; they
won't appear in people's clones unless they "git fetch origin
oldheads/skinenginebreak".

-- 
Torne Wuff
torne_at_wolfpuppy.org.uk