Re: 'git replace' and pushing

[Cory Fields <FOSS@AtlasTechnologiesInc.com>]

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Cory Fields
<FOSS@atlastechnologiesinc.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>  Real history
>>>  ------------
>>>  4' --- 5 --- 6
>>>
>>>  1 --- 2 --- 3 --- 4
>>>
>>>  Fake history
>>>  ------------
>>>  1 --- 2 --- 3 --- 4 --- 5 --- 6
>>>
>>>  Replacement ref
>>>  ---------------
>>>  4' --> 4
>>>
>>> This way, a person a person can fetch either piece of real history
>>> without trouble, and if they fetch the replacement ref, too, the
>>> history is pasted together.
>>>
>>> It is not possible in git to push a commit without its ancestors;
>>> replacement refs do not change that.
>>
>> True, but I suspect the above picture pretty much satisfies Cory's initial
>> wish, no?  You can fetch recent 4'--5---6 history as if 4' were the root
>> commit, and if you fetched replacement that tells us to pretend that 4'
>> has 3 as its parent (and the history leading to 3), you will get a deeper
>> history.
>>
>
> Yes, both of these can be accomplished. I've managed to get that part
> working, where a
> default clone pulls in half history, and fetching refs/replace gives
> you the rest. The only
> problem is that it requires a filter-branch before pushing. Otherwise,
> 4 gets pushed rather
> than 4', meaning that clones will require all the objects. So it
> works, but I'll have to spend
> quite a while making it 'perfect' so that I only have to rewrite history once.
>
> A shallow clone does not fit for us, because we want the default clone
> to only pull half.
> Having a public 1gb repository that will be cloned quite often is
> bound to make our host
> unhappy, so we're doing everything we can to get the size down.
>
> Also, maybe I haven't made this clear... the "real" commit IDs need to
> match the "fake"
> ones in order to prevent confusion. I think that's the part that makes
> this so difficult.
> Otherwise, something like this [1] would work just fine (probably
> exactly what Junio was
> suggesting)
>
> Any other suggestions? Or do I just have to face the fact that I'm
> going to have to break
> hashes?
>
> [1] http://progit.org/2010/03/17/replace.html
>
> Cory
>

Sorry for the stupid wrapping.. gmail and I are not getting along in
this thread!

Cory