Re: Git, where zombie branches shamble again

[G. Branden Robinson]

Hi, Larry!

At 2021-10-24T18:53:52-0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:58:55AM +1100, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Since I am now accused four times over of rewriting history, and
> > moreover of violating an "absolute taboo", I must insist upon the
> > presentation of particulars.
> 
> Hi, I'm the BitKeeper guy, nobody knows who I am but BitKeeper was
> the first distributed source management system, hg, git, etc are
> copies, I'm the guy that figured this model out.

Fear not!  I've known your name and (some of) your work for many years.

> If you did not rewrite history, which means you changed things so
> that a pull won't work or will create a massive merge mess, then
> you are fine.

As far as _I_ can tell, neither of these has taken place.

> The taboo is once you have some history, don't change that because
> all of the clones of your public repository depend on that history.

Agreed, and this is consistent with everything I've learned about
distributed revision control.

> I'd be happy to get on the phone with you if I could help.  While
> I may be an SCM guy, I've been a groff fan for decades.  Love to
> help.

I appreciate the offer.  I let this issue lie for a few days so Keith
could lay out the particulars of my cardinal sin, but none have proven
forthcoming.

Without an accurate description of damage done (if any) to the
repository, there is no way anyone can repair it.  And if there is none,
then charges of rewriting history are overblown, unwarranted, and
unfriendly.

This thread of contention will have to sleep until awakened by a
non-spurious interrupt.

Regards,
Branden

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature