Grokbase › Groups › PHP › php-internals › October 2013
FAQ
Hi internals.

Doing a git branch --all , I notice that we still carry very old branches
(back from the svn or even cvs times).

Here is the list :

remotes/origin/experimental/5.2-WITH_DRCP
   remotes/origin/experimental/5.3-FPM
   remotes/origin/experimental/RETURN_REF
   remotes/origin/experimental/ZendEngine2
   remotes/origin/experimental/apache_hooks
   remotes/origin/experimental/first_unicode_implementation
   remotes/origin/experimental/lemon
   remotes/origin/experimental/namespaces
   remotes/origin/experimental/new_apache_hooks
   remotes/origin/experimental/new_ui_api
   remotes/origin/experimental/newoperator
   remotes/origin/experimental/phar_tar
   remotes/origin/experimental/pre_new_hash_func
   remotes/origin/experimental/rand_redesign
   remotes/origin/experimental/the_5_4_that_isnt_5_4
   remotes/origin/experimental/threaded
   remotes/origin/experimental/with_scalar_types
   remotes/origin/experimental/zts_stdc_scanners
   remotes/origin/experimetnal/RETURN_REF_PATCH
   remotes/origin/immutable-date
   remotes/origin/master
   remotes/origin/migration/EXPERIMENTAL
   remotes/origin/migration/INITIAL
   remotes/origin/migration/RELEASE_1_0_0
   remotes/origin/migration/sqlite-start
   remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.1.2
   remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.29.2
   remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.3.2
   remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.67.2

We don't need git space, right ; but I think we need some cleanup to keep
consistency.
While I know "immutable-date" or even "lemon" could still be reworked on in
the future, I personnaly have absolutely no clue about
"migration/unlabaled-1.67.2" for example.
"experimental/the_5_4_that_isnt_5_4" is funny as well, I guess it's a try
for someone, I haven't diffed it anyway.
I assume some of our remote branches are both old and useless nowadays.

Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
and clean them up ?

Thx

Julien Pauli

Search Discussions

  • Yasuo Ohgaki at Oct 29, 2013 at 11:10 am ⇧
    Hi Julien,
    On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Julien Pauli wrote:

    We don't need git space, right ; but I think we need some cleanup to keep
    consistency.
    While I know "immutable-date" or even "lemon" could still be reworked on in
    the future, I personnaly have absolutely no clue about
    "migration/unlabaled-1.67.2" for example.
    "experimental/the_5_4_that_isnt_5_4" is funny as well, I guess it's a try
    for someone, I haven't diffed it anyway.
    I assume some of our remote branches are both old and useless nowadays.

    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    There are too many branches.

    +1 for removing fully merged branches. No point to keep them.
    +1 for removing discarded branches.
    +1 for old work in progress branches. If anyone need them, we can keep them
    locally.

    If we decided to keep some of them, renaming is needed at least.

    Regards,

    --
    Yasuo Ohgaki
    yohgaki@ohgaki.net
  • Julien Pauli at Oct 30, 2013 at 10:48 am ⇧

    On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:

    Hi Julien,
    On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Julien Pauli wrote:

    We don't need git space, right ; but I think we need some cleanup to keep
    consistency.
    While I know "immutable-date" or even "lemon" could still be reworked on
    in
    the future, I personnaly have absolutely no clue about
    "migration/unlabaled-1.67.2" for example.
    "experimental/the_5_4_that_isnt_5_4" is funny as well, I guess it's a try
    for someone, I haven't diffed it anyway.
    I assume some of our remote branches are both old and useless nowadays.

    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    There are too many branches.

    +1 for removing fully merged branches. No point to keep them.
    +1 for removing discarded branches.
    +1 for old work in progress branches. If anyone need them, we can keep
    them locally.

    If we decided to keep some of them, renaming is needed at least.

    Regards,

    I won't remove anything by myself.

    Im asking everyone to make a list of branches , and what action we should
    take about them (mainly : remove, or perhaps archive somewhere for some of
    them).

    Julien Pauli
  • Joe Watkins at Oct 29, 2013 at 11:18 am ⇧

    On 10/29/2013 10:56 AM, Julien Pauli wrote:
    Hi internals.

    Doing a git branch --all , I notice that we still carry very old branches
    (back from the svn or even cvs times).

    Here is the list :

    remotes/origin/experimental/5.2-WITH_DRCP
    remotes/origin/experimental/5.3-FPM
    remotes/origin/experimental/RETURN_REF
    remotes/origin/experimental/ZendEngine2
    remotes/origin/experimental/apache_hooks
    remotes/origin/experimental/first_unicode_implementation
    remotes/origin/experimental/lemon
    remotes/origin/experimental/namespaces
    remotes/origin/experimental/new_apache_hooks
    remotes/origin/experimental/new_ui_api
    remotes/origin/experimental/newoperator
    remotes/origin/experimental/phar_tar
    remotes/origin/experimental/pre_new_hash_func
    remotes/origin/experimental/rand_redesign
    remotes/origin/experimental/the_5_4_that_isnt_5_4
    remotes/origin/experimental/threaded
    remotes/origin/experimental/with_scalar_types
    remotes/origin/experimental/zts_stdc_scanners
    remotes/origin/experimetnal/RETURN_REF_PATCH
    remotes/origin/immutable-date
    remotes/origin/master
    remotes/origin/migration/EXPERIMENTAL
    remotes/origin/migration/INITIAL
    remotes/origin/migration/RELEASE_1_0_0
    remotes/origin/migration/sqlite-start
    remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.1.2
    remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.29.2
    remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.3.2
    remotes/origin/migration/unlabaled-1.67.2

    We don't need git space, right ; but I think we need some cleanup to keep
    consistency.
    While I know "immutable-date" or even "lemon" could still be reworked on in
    the future, I personnaly have absolutely no clue about
    "migration/unlabaled-1.67.2" for example.
    "experimental/the_5_4_that_isnt_5_4" is funny as well, I guess it's a try
    for someone, I haven't diffed it anyway.
    I assume some of our remote branches are both old and useless nowadays.

    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?

    Thx

    Julien Pauli
    Pointless to keep merged ones ...

    Don't remove anything interesting though, please ...

    Or if it must be removed, can we have a php-siberia ??

    Cheers
    Joe
  • David Soria Parra at Oct 30, 2013 at 3:55 pm ⇧

    Julien Pauli schrieb:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    This was discussed when we moved to git. If we delete the branches eventual
    commits will get lost. They honestly don't hurt at all unless you are super
    aestetic about it in which case you don't want to look at git branch -a anyway.
    Therefore I see no reason to remove them except for killing parts of PHP's
    version control system history.

    -1 for me.

    It's obv okay for branches that got merged.

    David
  • Leszek Krupiński at Oct 30, 2013 at 4:04 pm ⇧

    On 10/30/2013 4:55 PM, David Soria Parra wrote:
    Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net> schrieb:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    This was discussed when we moved to git. If we delete the branches eventual
    commits will get lost. They honestly don't hurt at all unless you are super
    aestetic about it in which case you don't want to look at git branch -a anyway.
    Therefore I see no reason to remove them except for killing parts of PHP's
    version control system history.

    -1 for me.

    It's obv okay for branches that got merged.

    David
    -1 as well. In git most branches don't take much space if any (branch is
    just a pointer to a commit - if this commit is also in another branch,
    no data is duplicated).

    --Leszek
  • Adam Harvey at Oct 30, 2013 at 4:59 pm ⇧

    On 29 October 2013 03:56, Julien Pauli wrote:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    Also -1 here. Command line tab completion and GitHub's branch
    filtering UI basically make the cognitive overhead of dealing with
    this minimal, and having a full history is important.

    Adam
  • Robert Williams at Oct 31, 2013 at 3:37 am ⇧
    In Subversion, nothing is ever really deleted. If you delete a branch, it still exists in the repository's history, and it can easily be resurrected with history intact. Is this not the way git works? (I'm obviously not real familiar with git.)

    --
    Bob Williams
    On Oct 30, 2013, at 10:00, "Adam Harvey" wrote:

    On 29 October 2013 03:56, Julien Pauli wrote:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    Also -1 here. Command line tab completion and GitHub's branch
    filtering UI basically make the cognitive overhead of dealing with
    this minimal, and having a full history is important.

    Adam

    --
    PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
    To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
    Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain information that is confidential. It constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, or if you believe that you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail or telephone and delete the e-mail and the attachments (if any).
  • Tim Düsterhus at Oct 31, 2013 at 10:10 am ⇧
    In git a branch simply is a pointer to a commit. If a branch is deleted
    the commit wil stay in the repository for the near future, but it will
    eventually be deleted (by git prune / git gc) as it is not referenced by
    anything.

    Tim
    On 31.10.2013 04:32, Robert Williams wrote:
    In Subversion, nothing is ever really deleted. If you delete a branch, it still exists in the repository's history, and it can easily be resurrected with history intact. Is this not the way git works? (I'm obviously not real familiar with git.)

    --
    Bob Williams
    On Oct 30, 2013, at 10:00, "Adam Harvey" wrote:

    On 29 October 2013 03:56, Julien Pauli wrote:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    Also -1 here. Command line tab completion and GitHub's branch
    filtering UI basically make the cognitive overhead of dealing with
    this minimal, and having a full history is important.

    Adam

    --
    PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
    To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
    Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain information that is confidential. It constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, or if you believe that you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail or telephone and delete the e-mail and the attachments (if any).
  • Yasuo Ohgaki at Oct 31, 2013 at 4:16 am ⇧
    Hi all,
    On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
    On 29 October 2013 03:56, Julien Pauli wrote:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    Also -1 here. Command line tab completion and GitHub's branch
    filtering UI basically make the cognitive overhead of dealing with
    this minimal, and having a full history is important.

    Unfortunately, we already lost important source code history in our git.
    Checkout PHP 4.X branches, then you'll see there aren't any Zend dirs.

    If we should keep current git data, how about create repository called
    git-lagacy.php.net? (And add missing Zend dirs for older PHP in there)

    Regards,

    --
    Yasuo Ohgaki
    yohgaki@ohgaki.net
  • Rparker at Oct 31, 2013 at 4:36 pm ⇧

    On 2013-10-30 21:15, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
    Hi all,
    On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Adam Harvey wrote:
    On 29 October 2013 03:56, Julien Pauli wrote:
    Could we make a list of the remote branches we really don't need
    anymore,
    and clean them up ?
    Also -1 here. Command line tab completion and GitHub's branch
    filtering UI basically make the cognitive overhead of dealing with
    this minimal, and having a full history is important.

    Unfortunately, we already lost important source code history in our
    git.
    Checkout PHP 4.X branches, then you'll see there aren't any Zend dirs.

    If we should keep current git data, how about create repository called
    git-lagacy.php.net? (And add missing Zend dirs for older PHP in there)

    Regards,

    --
    Yasuo Ohgaki
    yohgaki@ohgaki.net
    +1 for this idea. We need the history but the brances should be cleaned
    up.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupphp-internals @
categoriesphp
postedOct 29, '13 at 10:57a
activeOct 31, '13 at 4:36p
posts11
users9
websitephp.net

9 users in discussion

Julien Pauli: 2 posts Yasuo Ohgaki: 2 posts Tim Düsterhus: 1 post Joe Watkins: 1 post Robert Williams: 1 post David Soria Parra: 1 post Leszek Krupiński: 1 post Adam Harvey: 1 post Rparker: 1 post

Content

People

Support

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase