From: Jonathan Nieder Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 18:13:36 GMT Subject: Re: Converting to Git using svn-fe (Was: Speeding up the initial git-svn fetch) Message-ID: <20101018181336.GB6877@burratino> In-Reply-To: Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:28, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> I mean that rejecting a fetch because upstream has weird history >> would make no one happy. > > Agreed. What about when the remote's history is rewritten, do we want > to just transplant the new history, or do we do a forced update of the > remote? I think treating it as a usual non-fast-forward update makes sense. Log messages could be an annoying special case, though, since people edit those a lot. Does svn store the original log message somewhere? (Please forgive my ignorance). If not, I suppose downstream can publish refs produced by "git replace" to cope.