I will probably just tag the repo unless someone speaks up really wanting a branch.
-Alex On 1/11/16, 1:45 PM, "Andy Dufilie" <andy.dufi...@gmail.com> wrote: >Setting a tag seems like the best way. > >git tag mytagname >git push origin mytagname > >then do whatever you want. > >On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:10 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala ><bigosma...@gmail.com> >wrote: > >> 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 >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>
