Maybe this will work (based on this stackoverflow answer [1]) 1. Move the code to its own branch.
2. Then tag the branch: git tag archive/<branchname> <branchname> 3. Then delete the branch git branch -d <branchname> To restore the branch: git checkout -b <branchname> archive/<branchname> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1307114/how-can-i-archive-git-branches On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Michael Schmalle <teotigraphix...@gmail.com > wrote: > Can't you just create a tag like "Last know existence of FalconJS" commit > then delete. Or were other people saying they still wanted to code > somewhere, seems to me that was some of the conversation. > > Mike > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > Does anybody have an actual set of steps to create some sort of archival > > branch or can I just delete this project? > > > > -Alex > > > > On 12/21/15, 7:50 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > >Well garbage is relative. I didn't mean it in a derogatory way, only > that > > >the original authors were the ones that could understand it. > > > > > >As far as FlaconJX, I wrote that as a prototype based off of my prior > > >experience with AST traversing and the visitor pattern. That was almost > 3 > > >years ago now so as far as it actually getting refactored on an > > >application > > >level with compilation unit passes, it never happened! :) > > > > > >When iw rote the front and backend I was more using the Flex compiler > as a > > >template, and was slowing digesting how the multithreaded compilation > > >worked in Falcon. > > > > > >It that compiler was a full time/part time paid job for myself I could > > >easily put time into actually optimizing and documenting how the > > >compiler(Falcon) end actually runs. But that is not the case so we have > to > > >guess right now what actually could be changed. > > > > > >Besides, my solution was just one and there may be other ways that the > > >compiler could transpile as to js way faster but it's what I knew at the > > >time and had already done it in a few other projects. > > > > > >Mike > > > > > >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > >> @Harbs, > > >> > > >> I don't know enough about Git and branching to know if this is the > right > > >> way to "archive" stuff before deleting, but I would think that branch > > >> would need special handling after it is created because any attempt to > > >> merge with that branch might result in the deletion of that code. > > >> > > >> @Mark & Mike, > > >> > > >> Where would you create such an archive folder such that it doesn't > show > > >>up > > >> when grep-ing the code? IMO, that's the goal: on GitHub and locally, > I > > >> don't want these files to be found by search tools. > > >> > > >> @Mike, > > >> > > >> I would caution against calling that code base "garbage". It worked > > >>well > > >> enough to produce the early prototypes, and you never know when we > might > > >> want to seek the advice and participation of its author. Yeah, some > > >>parts > > >> of it were really hard to learn, but it did do things that I had to go > > >>fix > > >> again in FalconJX, and I think FalconJX still runs several of the > phases > > >> of the CompilationUnit code that we may need to stop doing some day > for > > >> performance reasons and go through another round of bug fixing when we > > >>do, > > >> because semantic errors seem to be caught during reduction. FalconJS > > >>was > > >> leveraging the CompilationUnit phases. > > >> > > >> -Alex > > >> > > >> On 12/21/15, 3:27 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> >Yup, I agree, it doesn't really need to be deleted but it needs to be > > >>so > > >> >far away from FalconJX that a common dev wouldn't mistake it for > > >>anything > > >> >other than archived history. > > >> > > > >> >The code is garbage, another reason why FalconJX even exists, I hated > > >>that > > >> >code with a passion. :) > > >> > > > >> >Mike > > >> > > > >> >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Kessler CTR Mark J < > > >> >mark.kessler....@usmc.mil> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Might as well make an archive folder that's generic and we can put > > >> >> anything else we want to keep but don't want in the main source > > >>areas. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> -Mark > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
