It is fragile, as there is no way for the revision machinery to say "but
now I want to traverse the graph ignoring the graft file" e.g. when
pushing commits to a remote repository (which, as a consequence, can
miss commits).

And we already have a better solution with `git replace --graft <comit>
[<parent>...]`.

Changes since v1:

- Fixed typo (stich -> stitch).

- Added reference in the commit message to the patch where `git replace`
  reached feature parity with the graft file.

- Added the --convert-graft-file option to `git replace` (with tests).

- Adjusted the advice to suggest --convert-graft-file instead.

- Adjusted the documentation of filter-branch and technical/shallow to
  reflect the fact that grafts are deprecated.

Johannes Schindelin (7):
  replace: "libify" create_graft()
  replace: introduce --convert-graft-file
  Add a test for `git replace --convert-graft-file`
  Deprecate support for .git/info/grafts
  filter-branch: stop suggesting to use grafts
  technical/shallow: describe the relationship with replace refs
  technical/shallow: describe why shallow cannot use replace refs

 Documentation/git-filter-branch.txt |  2 +-
 Documentation/git-replace.txt       | 11 +++--
 Documentation/technical/shallow.txt | 24 +++++++----
 advice.c                            |  2 +
 advice.h                            |  1 +
 builtin/replace.c                   | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 commit.c                            | 10 +++++
 t/t6001-rev-list-graft.sh           |  9 +++++
 t/t6050-replace.sh                  | 20 +++++++++
 9 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

base-commit: fe0a9eaf31dd0c349ae4308498c33a5c3794b293

Submitted-As: https://public-inbox.org/git/cover.1524125760.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de
In-Reply-To: https://public-inbox.org/git/0f0942043678fe76f8d654306482ee26fac643f0.1523617836.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de