On 3 March 2015 at 10:03, Martin Lucina <[email protected]> wrote: > [email protected] said: >> Isn't that mainly a different version of submodules where the subtrees >> are going to continue to exist and you may want to pull changes? Don't >> we just want to do a straight merge to keep the histories and then >> phase out the old repos? > > AFAICT this (git subtree) does exactly what you're describing -- the > problem with doing it any other way is that we have overlapping filenames > in the repositories and you'd have to rewrite their histories to be able to > just pull the changes from both into the unified repository. > > Unlike submodules, the resulting commits live fully in the new repository, > so after the merge we'd just clean up the duplicate bits manually and > deprecate the old repositories as planned.
Oh I see. I think you can also take empty repo create new branch merge repo1 git mv to subdir repeat for repo 2 merge both branches into master Looks like both have the same effect though.
