4 ms·
> It's called a directory copy. Cut + paste. I'd add a tag with a comment pointing to the old repo (if needed). But probably after a few weeks, no one is going
by dmazzoni 2y ago
> It's called a directory copy. Cut + paste. I'd add a tag with a comment pointing to the old repo (if needed). But probably after a few weeks, no one is going to look at the old repo.
Not in my experience. I use "git blame" all the time, and routinely read through commits from many years ago in order to understand why a particular method works the way it does.
Luckily, there are many tools for merging git repos into each other while preserving history. It's not as simple as copy and paste, but it's worth the extra efford.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- CRConrad 2y agoAny tips on where to find these tools, or just generally find out how that works?
- oftenwrong 2y agoAn approach I've used is to use https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo (amazing, versatile tool) to put the tree into a subdirectory, and namespace its tags, and then merge that into another tree with --allow-unrelated-histories. I built a tool for an employer that automated this process for the purpose of consolidating an excessive number of repositories.
- CRConrad 2y agoThanks!