On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 08:40:36AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > With or without the security issue, leaving old object names that > will become irrelevant in the rewritten history will make the > resulting history less useful, simply because people cannot look at > the objects these messages refer to. The same argument is behind the > reason why "cherry-pick -x" was originally the default, found to be > a mistake and made optional. > > filter-branch provides "map" helper function to help mapping old > object names to rewritten object names, but stops there; it leaves > it up to the message filter script to identify what string in the > message is an object name to be rewritten. > > It can be taught to be more helpful to the message filter writers, > and you seem to have done so in BFG, which is very good.
Yeah, it would make sense for filter-branch to have a "--map-commit-ids" option or similar that does the update. At first I thought it might take two passes, but I don't think it is necessary, as long as we traverse the commits topologically (i.e., you cannot have mentioned X in a commit that is an ancestor of X, so you do not have to worry about mapping it until after it has been processed). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
