Another gnucash git question

[John Ralls]

On May 8, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:

> On zaterdag 7 mei 2011, John Ralls wrote:
>> Geert,
>> 
>> It seems to be saying that git-svn expects to find a ref called
>> gnucash/branches/sx-fixes, but it's finding
>> gnucash/gnucash/branches/sx-fixes instead. I imagine that this is an
>> artifact of your previous git svn init, so it might take a little surgery
>> with git update-ref to clean up.
>> 
>> You might start with `grep sx-fixes .git/packed-refs` to see what shows up.
> $ grep sx-fixes .git/packed-refs 
> b72597a36b198fb4f2a33e1c474279f1a4f4e299 refs/remotes/origin/sx-fixes
> 612b5223a5e830f55c8736c645921db72c04dd0f refs/remotes/origin/sx-fixes at 7914
> b72597a36b198fb4f2a33e1c474279f1a4f4e299 refs/remotes/sx-fixes
> 612b5223a5e830f55c8736c645921db72c04dd0f refs/remotes/sx-fixes at 7914
> 
>> You might also look in .git/svn/refs/remotes/svn. In my gnucash-git
>> working directory I have only "trunk", but on the server which does the
>> mirroring all of the branches are listed directly (e.g.,
>> .git/svn/refs/remotes/svn/sx-fixes).
> I found all the branches listed under
> .git/svn/refs/remotes/
> There is no svn directory in there, but there is a git-svn directory, which is 
> empty.
> 
> I tried removing (rm -fr) the branches from the remotes directory, but this 
> didn't change anything.
> 
> I'm starting to feel my attempted approach to convert an existing git-svn repo 
> into a clean repo that tracks your github repo is a dead end, or at least 
> requires a disproportionate amount of time and knowledge.
> 
> At this point I'm inclined to instead simply clone your repo as described in 
> the wiki and use git format-patch/git am to copy my local working branches 
> over.
> 
> I do appreciate your guidance so far, but the internals of git are still too 
> vague for me to really know what I'm doing.
> 
> So unless you would like to continue this conversion attempt to determine if 
> it's feasible, I won't persue this myself.
> 
> Thanks for your support so far.

Geert, 

You're welcome, and that does sound like a good idea.
You might rebase the branches from your old repo to branches newly created to descend from the appropriate revisions on the freshly cloned repo. That has the best odds of preserving your history.

Regards,
John Ralls