Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Deleting obsolete branches

Please consider also removing dead git repos https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=434613 while cleaning up.

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marc Khouzam" <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "CDT DEV (cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx)" <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 4:38:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Deleting obsolete branches
> 
> Hi,
> 
> following-up on this minor cleanup of some of our old branches.  I'm about to
> push the following branch/tag
> changes to the CDT repo.
> 
> The history  for branch sd90 can be found from its final merge point:
> 5a04c15baab806be23f95c343c75659f4158db78
> I therefore deleted ‘sd90’ which was pointing to a commit already on master.
> It can be re-created from that commit.
> 
> I replaced the branch GDBStandalone with a tag ‘GDBStandalone’, which I
> verified, does keep the history.
> I replaced 'bug_197989' with a tag 'OldSolution_bug_197989'.  I believe this
> code was obsoleted by branch
> 'bug_197989_B' (c2cec226b35aeae02216daa1153727b95419e215), but I wasn't sure
> if the old history could
> be useful, so I kept it.
> 
> I deleted ‘MultiProcess’ and ‘NewMultiProcess’ which had been created by
> mistake and whose code was
> pushed to master shortly after.
> 
> I deleted 'bug_197989_B' which was merged in master at
> c2cec226b35aeae02216daa1153727b95419e215
> I deleted 'bug_299911' which was merged in master at
> e39899ec2329c1b44c7a77c520ba3cf2481d6d76
> I deleted 'bug_45203' which was merged in master at
> 48c9cc0b7377f236440209733bea0e6f8753ae9e
> 
> There a bunch of cdt_*_* branches also.  I think those should be converted
> into tags (if those tags don't
> exist already).  I haven't done that just yet but maybe later.  Let me know
> if you disagree.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marc
> 
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Marc Khouzam
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 2:14 PM
> To: 'CDT General developers list.'
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Deleting obsolete branches
> 
> Thanks Andrew, that is a good point I hadn’t considered.
> 
> In the case of sd90, it was merged into master, so the history will remain;
> in fact, the branch sd90 (9bc85c77a33)
> is actually a commit on the master branch, so it does not add much value
> (unless it is being used as a tag?)
> 
> I think (but I’ll check to be sure) that the other branches are in the same
> situation, except for the GDBStandalone,
> which was not merged, but something like squashed into a single commit.  In
> that case, keeping the branch
> seems a good idea so as to not loose the history.
> 
> If I used a tag instead of a branch, would it be as effective in keeping the
> history?  It would allow to keep our
> branches to a minimum and yet, have all the history.  I’ll look into it.
> 
> Thanks for the quick answers
> 
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Andrew Gvozdev
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 1:53 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Deleting obsolete branches
> 
> Hi Marc,
> sd90 branch should stay in repository as it keeps the history of changes.
> Master branch does not keep that history as it was a merge, not rebasing or
> cherrypicking.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew
> 
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> Hi (mostly Jeff, Mikhail, Andrew and Sergey),
> 
> I had a quick mishap with the repo this morning which required me to remove a
> branch I had pushed by mistake.
> This made me think I could take the opportunity to clean up some old branches
> that seem useless.
> I find that the more clutter we have in CDT, the harder it is for new-comers
> to figure how things work.
> 
> After investigation I'd like to start with the below.
> Let me know if you want to keep those branches.
> 
> remotes/origin/GDBStandalone  (I believe this was made as a new commit that
> was pushed to master)
> 
> remotes/origin/MultiProcess (created by mistake, feature is in master)
> remotes/origin/NewMultiProcess (created by mistake, feature is in master)
> 
> remotes/origin/sd90 (merged into master)
> remotes/origin/bug_197989_B (merged into master)
> remotes/origin/bug_299911 (merged into master)
> remotes/origin/bug_45203 (merged into master)
> 
> remotes/origin/bug_197989 (seems obsolete, replaced by _B branch which went
> into master)
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Marc
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev


Back to the top