From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: Trying to use git-filter-branch to compress history by removing large, obsolete binary files Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:05:14 -0400 Message-ID: <20071008190514.GM2902@fieldses.org> References: <51419b2c0710071624v79dc02d2g35a265add50dd46d@mail.gmail.com> <51419b2c0710071638p6dcc0c7cm2a813c22758e6f32@mail.gmail.com> <20071008010033.GA25654@fieldses.org> <4709CCB2.4000202@viscovery.net> <20071008143650.GC2902@fieldses.org> <20071008163701.GA5868@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Sixt , Johannes Schindelin , Elijah Newren , Frank Lichtenheld , git@vger.kernel.org To: Theodore Tso X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Oct 08 21:05:54 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Iexv6-00084l-L5 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 21:05:52 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755445AbXJHTFY (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:05:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755197AbXJHTFX (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:05:23 -0400 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:56338 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754750AbXJHTFW (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:05:22 -0400 Received: from bfields by fieldses.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Iexuk-0005sO-EP; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:05:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071008163701.GA5868@thunk.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 12:37:01PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > I think what makes git-filter-branch different is that you can change > a large amount of history with git-filter-branch, including large > numbers of tags, etc. The reflog is quite sufficient to recover from > a screwed up "git commit --amend". But I don't think the reflog is > going to be sufficient given the kinds of changes that > git-filter-branch can potentially do to your repository. Maybe > default of --backup vs --no-backup could be changed via a config > parameter, but I think the default is of backing up refs is a good > think.... Yeah, it's clearly designed with rewriting a whole repo in mind. It might also be handy, though, as a quick way to rewrite a single branch. (E.g., "add 'Acked-by: Joe' to everything in 'for-upstream' not in 'origin'", or "rename foo to bar in every commit in 'topic' not in 'origin'".). I find the current defaults awkward for that case. Maybe it'd make sense to treat the two cases differently. > Perhaps a solution would be to add "git-filter-branch --cleanup" that > that clears the reflog and wipes the backed up tags; perhaps first > asking interactively if the user is really sure he/she wants to do > this. Maybe. --b.