Hi,
On 17.01.20 20:03, Nhat Khai wrote:
> This is call "refactor" de facto git history for better future :-). It
> that occurred, may as well add git-lfs for large bin files as well- will
> help reduce time for fresh clone too.
No, we're not supposed to have large binary files in that tree --
Hi,
On 17.01.20 18:02, Ian McInerney wrote:
> You can't just use the `git rebase
> master devBranch` command to fix it, since that will go back to the last
> unchanged commit before the binary blobs, then replay all the contents
> of their branch since then onto the current master - which will
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 4:46 PM Nick Østergaard wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 17:18, Ian McInerney
> wrote:
> >
> > There are 2 main issues I can see with rebasing:
> > 1) Rebuilding the history will change the commit hashes on master, which
> will throw off our 5.1 cherry-picked commit
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 17:18, Ian McInerney wrote:
>
> There are 2 main issues I can see with rebasing:
> 1) Rebuilding the history will change the commit hashes on master, which will
> throw off our 5.1 cherry-picked commit messages that refer to the master
> commit they came from (there are
There are 2 main issues I can see with rebasing:
1) Rebuilding the history will change the commit hashes on master, which
will throw off our 5.1 cherry-picked commit messages that refer to the
master commit they came from (there are at least 4 that this would happen
to).
2) The GitLab merge
Personally, I think "history is inviolate" doesn't need to apply to things
that were checked in accidentally, and thus will never need to be merged
against, diffed, etc.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 10:48 AM Simon Richter
wrote:
> Hi Seth,
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 06:53:46AM -0800, Seth Hillbrand
Hi Seth,
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 06:53:46AM -0800, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> >there are two massive blobs that were accidentally checked in, and
> >checking
> >out the repo requires these to be transferred. Should we make an
> >exception
> >and rebase the tree to remove them from the history?
> I
I think it would be better to just rebase to get rid of that object.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 16:08, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>
> On 1/17/20 9:53 AM, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> > On 2020-01-17 03:23, Simon Richter wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> there are two massive blobs that were accidentally checked in,
On 1/17/20 9:53 AM, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> On 2020-01-17 03:23, Simon Richter wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> there are two massive blobs that were accidentally checked in, and
>> checking
>> out the repo requires these to be transferred. Should we make an
>> exception
>> and rebase the tree to remove them
On 2020-01-17 03:23, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
there are two massive blobs that were accidentally checked in, and
checking
out the repo requires these to be transferred. Should we make an
exception
and rebase the tree to remove them from the history?
Simon
I would say no. History is
Hi,
there are two massive blobs that were accidentally checked in, and checking
out the repo requires these to be transferred. Should we make an exception
and rebase the tree to remove them from the history?
Simon
___
Mailing list:
11 matches
Mail list logo