Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] Recommend git-filter-repo instead of git-filter-branch

>
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > diff --git a/git-filter-branch.sh b/git-filter-branch.sh
> > index 5c5afa2b98..f805965d87 100755
> > --- a/git-filter-branch.sh
> > +++ b/git-filter-branch.sh
> > @@ -83,6 +83,19 @@ set_ident () {
> >       finish_ident COMMITTER
> >  }
> >
> > +if [ -z "$FILTER_BRANCH_SQUELCH_WARNING" -a \
> > +     -z "$GIT_TEST_DISALLOW_ABBREVIATED_OPTIONS" ]; then
>
> This is probably the only place where [] instead of "test" is used
> in our shell scripts.
>
> if test -z "$FILTER_BRANCH_SQUELCH_WARNING$GIT_TEST_DISALLOW_ABBREVIATED_OPTIONS"
> then
>     ...

> > +     cat <<EOF
> > +WARNING: git-filter-branch has a glut of gotchas generating mangled history
> > +         rewrites.  Please use an alternative filtering tool such as 'git
> > +         filter-repo' (https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo/) instead.
> > +         See the filter-branch manual page for more details; to squelch
> > +         this warning, set FILTER_BRANCH_SQUELCH_WARNING=1.
> > +
> > +EOF
> > +     sleep 5
> > +fi
>
> This should say it is "sleeping while showing the message and can
> safely be killed before starting to do any harm"; alternatively it
> should lose the "sleep".  The user would have fear against typing ^C
> to get out of a bulk history rewrite command, and the message itself
> is making the fear worse.  If your goal is to discourage its use,
> then it would be a good idea to make it clear when it is safe to
> kill it before going and studying the alternative.  Otherwise, the
> sleep does not help that much---the main complaint is that filter
> branch is too slow, so the user has plenty of time to read the
> message anyway, right? ;-)