Am 28.01.2017 um 06:31 schrieb Martin Owens:
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 21:18 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
That sounds frustrating.

Can you explain in more detail what the issue was, so we know what to
avoid?
It's about how the modifications are recorded as merges. Git has this
option of making the history all nice and flat, i.e. a rebase. I needed
to use it because Moini's commits had caused 90% of the history to be
doubled, basically making the repository broken.

So as long as you never ever have to touch the history once it's made,
it might be ok. But other git experts would be good.

Martin,
Do I understand correctly, that you re-wrote history and Maren merged her branch which was based on a former checkout with the original history? In that case it's not surprising you'll have the original history and your re-written history side-by-side.

However this could have probably been fixed by simply rebasing Maren's changes on the then latest version of the repository.

In either case this should not happen during "normal" operation, right? Rewriting history is an absolute no-go for public repositories (which is why we have append-only branches in Bazaar) and once the migration is complete I hope nobody will ever fiddle with history again.

Regards,
Eduard