Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>I have a git repo with some very large binaries in it. I no longer need them, and I don't care about being able to checkout the files from earlier commits. So, to reduce the repo size, I want to delete the binaries from the history altogether.</p> <p>After a web search, I concluded that my best (only?) option is to use <code>git-filter-branch</code>:</p> <pre><code>git filter-branch --index-filter 'git rm --cached --ignore-unmatch big_1.zip big_2.zip etc.zip' HEAD </code></pre> <p>Does this seem like a good approach so far?</p> <p>Assuming the answer is yes, I have another problem to contend with. The <a href="http://git-scm.com/docs/git-filter-branch" rel="noreferrer">git manual has this warning</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>WARNING! The rewritten history will have different object names for all the objects and will not converge with the original branch. You will not be able to easily push and distribute the rewritten branch on top of the original branch. Please do not use this command if you do not know the full implications, and avoid using it anyway, if a simple single commit would suffice to fix your problem. (See the "RECOVERING FROM UPSTREAM REBASE" section in git-rebase(1) for further information about rewriting published history.)</p> </blockquote> <p>We have a remote repo on our server. Each developer pushes to and pulls from it. Based on the warning above (and my understanding of how <code>git-filter-branch</code> works), I don't think I'll be able to run <code>git-filter-branch</code> on my local copy and then push the changes.</p> <p>So, I'm tentatively planning to go through the following steps:</p> <ol> <li>Tell all my developers to commit, push, and stop working for a bit.</li> <li>Log into the server and run the filter on the central repo.</li> <li>Have everyone delete their old copies and clone again from the server.</li> </ol> <p>Does this sound right? Is this the best solution?</p>
    singulars
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PTQuestion
    1. USRoberto Tyley
    1. USrlkw1024
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PL
      singulars
      1. LTLinked
    2. PL
      singulars
      1. LTLinked
    3. PL
      singulars
      1. LTLinked
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    2. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    3. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COIt occurs to me now that the *easiest* thing to do might be to have your developers each run the identical `git-filter-branch` command. They should end up with histories identical to what you produced without having to re-clone or manually rebase.
      singulars
      1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
      1. USBen Jackson
    2. CO@BenJackson the code files would be identical, but the commit objects will have different committer metadata added by the rebase.
      singulars
      1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
      1. USDouglas
    3. CO@Douglas I don't think that `git filter-branch` alters committer data unless you explicitly ask it to. (`git commit --rebase` does, but not `git filter-branch`, as far as I can see.)
      singulars
      1. POUpdate a development team with rewritten Git repo history, removing big files
      1. UScdhowie
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload