For the record I'm currently -1 to copy the history. I'm mentioning because thomas has just copied the history from platform to commons and I don't want this to happen again till we close this VOTE.
As of now it's been our practice to not copy the history between our active repos (commons, rendering, platform, enterprise, etc) so we shouldn't copy them until the VOTE is passed. Thanks -Vincent On Feb 29, 2012, at 8:19 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: > Hi, > > On Feb 28, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: > >> Hi devs, >> >> Since I plan to move some stuff from platform to commons I would like >> to know what you think of the history in this case. >> >> Pros including history: >> * can access easily the whole history of a moved file. But sometimes >> changing packages etc make too much difference for git to see it's >> actually the same file so you loose it anyway. >> >> Cons including history: >> * double the history which make tools like ohloh indicate wrong informations >> * it's a lot easier to move without history >> >> WDYT ? >> >> Even if it was looking a bit weird to me at first I'm actually +1 to >> not move the history in this case. > > +1, FTR I'd be -0, close to -1 to move it. If/when the source repository is > removed for one reason or another, then we might want to import its history > somewhere. > > So the general rule for me is: Copy history when the source repository is > removed/deleted/not used anymore. > >> Eduard was proposing to include in the first commit of the new >> repository the id of the last commit containing the files (basically >> the id of the parent of the commit deleting the files) in the old >> repository so that it's easier to find it. I'm +1 for this. > > +1 > > Thanks > -Vincent > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
