On 2010-03-22, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>
> I've taken another look at fixing lily's history this weekend,
> it should be ready now to replace our old broken repository,
> have a look at the result
>
> git clone http://lilypond.org/people/janneke/vc/hysterical-lily.git
Wow, this is very awesome! That must have been a tremendous effort. :)
Just a side note: cloning over HTTP by default is really inefficient
right now, so the download size of the above repo is ~900MB. After
running `git gc --aggressive', the repo shrinks to the normal size
(~120MB).
> Our current GIT archive suffers from major problems in the
> CVS->GIT conversion, and also at the time of CVS conversion
> (looong ago), so if you go further back than release 1.5.49,
> you get eventually into some sort of crappy cycles like
>
> 3114c9b lilypond-0.0.1
> 673ae03 lilypond-0.0.9
> 3d9b7e6 lilypond-0.0.1
> 27058a7 lilypond-0.0.1
> f5a68ac lilypond-0.0.1
> 0292bf9 lilypond-0.0.1
> 1c3b8de flower-1.0.18
> 8e98b32 flower-1.0.2
> f53fdff lilypond-0.0.1
Yeah, I've noticed that. The new repo looks much better.
> The new archive fixes this and has a smooth history line
> all down to
>
> $ git log --abbrev-commit --pretty=oneline | tail
> a7cbcf7 release: 0.0.3
> 8f9609a release: 0.0.2
> f9ae673 release: 0.0.1
> fc51c93 Initial.
>
> it contains all stable branches and tags and also fixes/
> unifies some weird email addresses from the CVS and pre-CVS
> era. It is up-to date as of yesterday evening (6510c4a).
This is mostly true. There are still some random commits that have
CVS-style usernames. For example, in the new repo,
$ git show bc86bf
displays
commit bc86bf019ae3d2f03c12e8b52527bd5eb48283f3
Author: jneem <jneem>
Date: Thu Aug 10 05:53:53 2006 +0000
convert-ly the user manual
But, overall, there are relatively few of these cases. Most of them
have been fixed.
> There's one small problem with replacing the old repository,
> *all* committishes change, and everyone will have to make
> a fresh clone, and any work based on the old repository
> must be copied over to the new clone using git format-patch
> and git am.
I'm generally okay with this. Of course, it would be optimal to fix
only the "pre-Git" part of LilyPond's history, but I imagine that
would take a lot of work.
Thanks a lot, Jan. This will be incredibly helpful for the Ohloh
project page, too.
-Patrick
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
