Re: Cover grafting in the Git User's Manual

[Peter Baumann <waste.manager@gmx.de>]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 02:20:32PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Peter Baumann <waste.manager@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 07:23:01PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> The only mention of grafting in the manual is in the glossary:
> >> 
> >>     Grafts enables two otherwise different lines of development to
> >>     be joined together by recording fake ancestry information for
> >>     commits. This way you can make git pretend the set of parents
> >>     a commit has is different from what was recorded when the
> >>     commit was created. Configured via the .git/info/grafts file.
> >> 
> >> I believe it would be useful to cover this better, perhaps in chapter
> >> 5. Rewriting history and maintaining patch series.  It certainly would
> >> have saved me a few hours of digging.  I already understood enough of
> >> git to *know* that what I wanted must be possible (supply missing
> >> parents of merges in a repository imported with parsecvs), but I
> >> didn't know the magic keyword was graft.  I managed to figure it out
> >> >from the glossary, git-filter-branch(1) and GitWiki's GraftPoint page.
> >> 
> >> I'm neither writer nor git expert, but here's my try anyway:
> >> 
> >> Rewriting ancestry with grafts
> >> 
> >> Grafts enables two otherwise different lines of development to be
> >> joined together by recording fake ancestry information for commits.
> >> This way you can make git pretend the set of parents a commit has is
> >> different from what was recorded when the commit was created.
> >> 
> >> Why would you want to do that?  Say, you imported a repository from an
> >> SCM that doesn't record merges properly, e.g. CVS.  Grafts let you add
> >> the missing parents to the merge commits.  Or you switched your
> >> project to git by populating a new repository with current sources,
> >> and later decide you want more history.  Committing old versions is
> >> easy enough, but you also need to graft a parent to your original root
> >> commit.
> >> 
> >> Graft points are configured via the .git/info/grafts file.  It has one
> >> record per line describing a commit and its fake parents by listing
> >> object names separated by a space and terminated by a newline.
> >> 
> >>     <commit sha1> <parent sha1> [<parent sha1>]*
> >> 
> >> A graft point does not actually change its commit.  Nothing can.  What
> >> can be done is rewriting the commit and its descendants.
> >> git-filter-branch does that:
> >> 
> >>     $ cat .git/info/grafts
> >>     db5a561750ae87615719ae409d1f50c9dfc3fa71 08f2fa81d104b937c1f24c68f56e9d5039356764 8c231303bb995cbfdfd1c434a59a7c96ea2f0251
> >>     git-filter-branch HEAD ^08f2fa81d104b937c1f24c68f56e9d5039356764 ^8c231303bb995cbfdfd1c434a59a7c96ea2f0251
> >> 
> >> This rewrites history between head and the graft-point to include the
> >> grafted parents.
> >
> > Did I overlook something or isn't
> >
> >      git-filter-branch HEAD ^db5a561750ae87615719ae409d1f50c9dfc3fa71
> >
> > what you are looking for? Only db5a56 could get rewritten and obviously
> > all the commits having it as a parent.
> >
> > -Peter
> 
> That rewrites all commits reachable from HEAD that are not reachable
> >from db5a56.  In particular, it doesn't rewrite db5a56, does it?

Uh. You are right. I *meant*

	git filter-branch HEAD ^db5a561750ae87615719ae409d1f50c9dfc3fa71^


-Peter