Issue running git-svn-mirror script on code

[John Ralls]

On Jan 22, 2013, at 7:01 AM, Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> wrote:

> That's ugly...
> 
> Chris Shoemaker is the name associated with svn name "chris", so the issue is indeed in the github repo.
> 
> I agree to restart from scratch on github. I also prefer correctness of authorship.
> 
> I have a couple of local branches with commits not on github, but that doesn't matter. They can easily be moved over to a fresh and fixed clone. I'd use git format-patch to export the branches into convenient patches, which are easy to import in the new repo using git-am. Would take only a couple of minutes in all.
> 
> On github, you can delete the repos we control, but the clones will not be dropped.
> 
> To be fair to the other clones, I think we should try to communicate as much as possible about the issue, the cause, how we intend to fix it, the impact it will have and how others can recover.
> 
> There are a couple of channels we can use:
> - the main website
> - the mailing lists
> - the git wiki
> - perhaps our facebook and google+ groups
> - if possible some form of direct communication inside github to the other fork owners

They're called 'forks' on Github. I just looked through the network, and only one of them, hendrickvanantwerpen, has significant changes; another, salborini, has just one change. In all, only 15 forks. We can easily contact each of them via Github to warn them that we're about to regenerate the repos to fix history.

Likely there are lots of folks who have cloned the main source repo privately, but I doubt many of them are actively using it. ISTM a "News" item on the main web page, echoed on the social network streams, will suffice to alert anyone who cares. We can add a note on the wiki mentioning the regeneration after the fact, so that anyone who does miss the news item will have some guidance about how to recover when their repo won't fast-forward.

Regards,
John Ralls