On 8/26/2019 7:52 PM, Elijah Newren wrote: > Following up on the suggestion to make git.git smaller and shed non-core > tools, here's an RFC series to do so with git-filter-branch. This > series first removes dependencies on git-filter-branch (of which there > were very few), and then deletes git-filter-branch itself in the final > commit. > > I'm more than happy to consider alternate places for the filter-branch > history (I had considered just merging it in with git-filter-repo), but > for now I just made it available here: > https://github.com/newren/git-filter-branch > > The rewrite above contains the history of the files deleted in Patch 5, > plus a one-time copy of relevant build files (Makefiles, test-lib.sh, > etc. -- I didn't want the whole history of these), and then touchups to > streamline the build files and make them all work in this standalone > repo. > > > Some highlevel notes on the patches: > > * Patches 1&2: are good cleanups & performance wins regardless of > whether the rest of the series is taken I agree! These are great. I just had a nit about extracting a helper instead of copy-pasting the same three lines in multiple tests. > * Patch 3: an attempt to improve i18n situation for external scripts, > but discovered to not be necessary/useful for git-filter-branch > specifically I'm not sure this is super-important now, but could be saved for a later date, when it is important. > * Patch 4: > * If we are good with deleting git-filter-branch now and just noting > it in the release notes, then patch 4 could be simplified; there's > no need to update git-filter-branch.txt in that case. > * If, however, we want to do some external messaging for an > additional release cycle or two before moving git-filter-branch > out of git.git, this patch will help us until then to at least > avoid recommending a tool which will likely mangle user's data in > unexpected ways. But it'd be really helpful if folks could review > and opine on the BFG stuff if so. I think this is a good step, and should be taken even if we never plan to take Patch 5. > * Patch 5: actually deletes git-filter-branch, its tests, and > documentation. This is the one where others need to chime in with opinions. I think this one can only be taken if we have a concrete plan about how to support the tool _somehow_, even if it is "go download the script from this place; it may have broken since we last tested it." Yes, we want to strongly recommend that people use newer, better tools. That's not always something users can accept. Having the tool live somewhere that is accessible can appease some users for a while, and it can decay and die a slow death there. Thanks, -Stolee
