Hi Pasky, On Wednesday 02 May 2007 18:15, Petr Baudis wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 04:24:24PM CEST, Jan Holesovsky wrote: > > > What might help here is splitting repository into current (e.g. from > > > OOo 2.0) and historical part, > > > > No, I don't want this ;-) > > Are you sure? Using the graft mechanism, Git can make this very easy and > almost transparent for the user - when he clones he gets no history but > he can use say some simple vendor-provided script to download the > historical packfile and graft it to the 'current' tree. After that, the > graft acts completely transparently and it 'seems' like the history > goes on continuously from OOo prehistory up to the latest commit. Interesting, I did not know that it is possible to do it so that it appears transparently; this would be indeed a tremendous win - we could start nearly from scratch ;-) Please - where could I find more info? Like what does the script have to do, etc. > Besides, in case you discover a year later that the conversion was > broken in some places etc., you can just fix this, re-run the conversion > and simply regraft your history to point at the 'new' historical commit, > without affecting your current development and commit ids at all. For > this reason alone, I'd seriously consider grafting history separately > when migrating any non-trivial project from other SCM to Git. > > Then again, due to the sheer tree sizes etc., I'm not sure how much > would throwing the history away actually reduce the packfile size. Thanks a lot, Jan - 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