On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 05:46:15PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> Dumb question (I have not even read the patch, so please just ignore me
> if this is indeed dumb!): Is the map of <original-name, anonymized-name>
> available to the user while he attempts to confirm that the bug is still
> present?
No, it's not.
> For example, if I anonymized git.git, and did 'git branch -v' (say), how
> easy would it be for me to recognise which branch was 'next'?
You can't, really. The simplest thing would be to pare down your
repository to the minimum number of branches before anonymizing.
It might make sense to have an option to dump the maps we've stored to a
separate file (in theory, you could even load them back in and do an
incremental anonymized export[1]). I think I'd rather wait on
implementing that until we see more real-world use cases (but as always,
I'm happy to review if somebody wants to pick it up).
-Peff
[1] Incremental anonymization is not something I think is worth
supporting by itself. However, there may be some value in being able
to anonymize two similar repositories using the same mappings. For
instance, a repository and its clone.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html