----- Original Message -----
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Deleting obsolete branches
>
> What's a dead git repo? As long as it has content that someone may want, we > can't really get rid of it.
If that's the case - my mistake.
From names and activities some of them(old,master) looked more like leftovers from some experiments.
Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team
>
> Doug.
>
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Deleting obsolete branches
>
> Please consider also removing dead git repos
> <
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto: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:
> 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:
> [
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<
mailto: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<
mailto: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 > >
>
