Re: git: uh-oh

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 22:06, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>>> You're saying you don't "require" a fix on the latest issue here? Or
>>> should we spend some time trying to figure out if we can fix it with
>>> git-filter-branch?
>>
>> I think that "the latest issue here" is the issue of how files get
>> added to branches, which we discussed before with pretty much the same
>> set of conclusions.  I'm not wild about the way that's getting
>> converted, but I'm not sure I care enough about it to argue with Tom.
>> However, I want to convince myself that the deletes we've done over
>> the years have been properly handled.  I need to look at Max's latest
>> conversion and I'll look at yours as well.
>
> Magnus -
>
> I just looked at your latest conversion (based on what Max did) and it
> looks a lot better.  I think, though, that we should re-remove these
> branches:
>
>  origin/unlabeled-1.44.2
>  origin/unlabeled-1.51.2
>  origin/unlabeled-1.59.2
>  origin/unlabeled-1.87.2
>  origin/unlabeled-1.90.2

Oh yeah, I did the push before I ran that step of my script. Oops, sorry.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/