> Welp, that precisely recreated it -- even identical shas! Looking at
> the b4 output, I do see a suspicious "39 commits" listed forsome reason.
Well, that's the point where the user, in theory, goes "this is weird, why is
it 39 commits," and does Ctrl-C, but I'm happy to accept blame here -- we
should be more careful with this operation and bail out whenever we recognize
that something has gone wrong. To begin with, we'll output a listing of all
the commits that will be rewritten, just to make it more obvious when things
are about to go wrong.
> So, I assume the "git-filter-repo" invocation is what mangled it. I will
> try to dig into what b4 actually asked it to doin the morning...
Thanks forlookinginto this. Linus, this is accurate and I am 100% convinced
that there was no malicious intent. My apologies forbeing part of the mess
through the tooling.
I will reinstate Kees's account so he can resume his work.
-K
> Welp, that precisely recreated it -- even identical shas! Looking at > the b4 output, I do see a suspicious "39 commits" listed for some reason. Well, that's the point where the user, in theory, goes "this is weird, why is it 39 commits," and does Ctrl-C, but I'm happy to accept blame here -- we should be more careful with this operation and bail out whenever we recognize that something has gone wrong. To begin with, we'll output a listing of all the commits that will be rewritten, just to make it more obvious when things are about to go wrong. > So, I assume the "git-filter-repo" invocation is what mangled it. I will > try to dig into what b4 actually asked it to do in the morning... Thanks for looking into this. Linus, this is accurate and I am 100% convinced that there was no malicious intent. My apologies for being part of the mess through the tooling. I will reinstate Kees's account so he can resume his work. -KI have also been done in many times by git-filter-repo. My condolences to the chef.