[racket-dev] proposal for moving to packages: repository

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Thu May 23 07:09:17 EDT 2013

Just now, Carl Eastlund wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
>     A few minutes ago, Carl Eastlund wrote:
>     >
>     > It doesn't seem wrong to me.  It's an accurate representation
>     > of the history of the project, which is exactly what git is
>     > for retaining.   Where does the problem come from?
>     The problem of filter-branch?  It has no problems, it does
>     exactly what it is supposed to do.
> It has "no problems"?  Where above you stated "this is exactly what
> you can't get with filter-branch" in reference to keeping our
> packages' relevant history.

"Relevant history" is vague.  The thing that you can't do with
filter-branch is keep the complete history if you remove files from
the history -- the files that are gone go with their history.

> But filter-branch is not what I was talking about.  I was talking
> about _not_ using filter-branch, and instead doing something that
> does keep history.

Like I said: what you're suggesting means keeping the full monolithic
history of developement in the main repo, including all of the
irrelevant files (which will be removed in the tip, but included in
the repo).

>     > If git filter-branch doesn't maintain the history we need, it's not
>     > the right tool for the job.
>     If the drracket files are irrelevant for the swindle package then they
>     shouldn't be in the swindle repository -- and on the exact same token,
>     the development history of drracket shouldn't be there either.
>     (This is not new, BTW, I think that there was general concensus right
>     from the start of the package talk that the monolithic repo is just a
>     host for a bunch of separate projects.)
> Okay, then let's purge the history of irrelevant files, but keep the
> history of relevant files even if they weren't in the "right"
> directory.  If the monolithic repo is just a host for a bunch of
> separate projects, shouldn't it be possible to tease out their
> more-or-less separate histories?

(*sigh*; please read the other email, where I went over this

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.