Subject: Re: [boost] [git] The any library does not pull cleanly because of a forced update on develop and master.
From: Ahmed Charles (acharles_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-12 06:08:56
> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 09:14:43 +0000
> From: daniel_at_[hidden]
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [git] The any library does not pull cleanly because of a forced update on develop and master.
> On 12 December 2013 03:44, Ahmed Charles <acharles_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> >> From: dave_at_[hidden]
> >> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:40:23 -0800
> >> Subject: Re: [boost] [git] The any library does not pull cleanly because of a forced update on develop and master.
> >> If there is not already a policy in place to prevent history rewriting
> >> in public branches, we should have one. And if there's a GitHub
> >> mechanism for denying the privilege, it should be enabled.
> > I happen to agree with Dave.
> > Is it possible to have a proposal to this effect put before the steering committee and have it voted on? The distinctions between whether it is allowed in general vs only during the 'git transition' and how long that transition lasts should be considered.
> > I'm willing to help with the details of the proposal, but I don't really know the process.
> We have to rewrite history because of this:
> It's a bit late to change plans now.
odeint and predef can both be solved with merging the 'original history' with the 'svn history' and you effectively get both. That's an accurate representation of what will actually happen.
I've personally used rewriting history for non-public changes (I think changes on development branches is private) and for reducing the size of certain repositories which contained binary files that shouldn't have been there.
I'm just pointing out that there is a difference between 'have to' and 'want to'.