Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added a guide to removing large files from repo history using bfg #249

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jun 5, 2019

Conversation

dustinfreeman
Copy link
Contributor

@dustinfreeman dustinfreeman commented Nov 6, 2018

This guide requested in #207, and based on my own experience described in greater detail in this blog post

I have tested this empirically in my own huge private game development repo as mentioned in the blog post, and just re-tested this behaviour with bfg-1.13.0 and git 2.19.1. I have to admit I don't have a deep understanding of git's backend, and have never even used git reflog, so a review of what I'm doing here is welcome.

@RichardLitt
Copy link
Collaborator

This is a good addition. The only thing I would add is a note that you may need to have Java working on your system before doing this.

Is there any chance you can explain how to do it with git filter-branch, too?

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@dustinfreeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

Currently working on a git-filter-branch implementation, and testing thoroughly.

@dustinfreeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

As I compare my git-filter-branch alternative to the sensitive data removal technique above, I notice that that subsection only removes the sensitive data from the latest commit, not all history.

I'm going to finish this pull request with git-filter-branch instructions, but then the sensitive and large file removal sections should likely be merged.

@dustinfreeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is done, but pending acceptance of #269

@dustinfreeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@deiga I've updated this PR on my fork with the latest from upstream master, including your #273 fix, but still have the old Travis CI error:

npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE
npm ERR! errno 1
npm ERR! git-flight-rules@1.0.0 diff: `test -z "`git diff -- README.md`" && test -z "`git diff -- README_*.md`"`
npm ERR! Exit status 1

I'm baffled. Is this TOC broken again? Is there some other way to read this error? Assistance appreciated.

@RichardLitt
Copy link
Collaborator

Yeah... I really don't care that much about the Travis error, if it is blocking us from having good content in here at all. I wouldn't worry about it. I'm going to merge this, because I think it's a useful addition. Good work. :)

@RichardLitt RichardLitt merged commit ad141ee into k88hudson:master Jun 5, 2019
aroup pushed a commit to aroup/git-flight-rules that referenced this pull request Jan 17, 2020
…8hudson#249)

* Explanation of removing large files using bfg

* doctoc applied to removing large files guide

* Remove large files: clean up wording

* Add subheadings to the large file removal section in preparation for git-filter-branch explanation

* large file removal: clean up headings

* large file removal: force push considerations note

* Add word "private" to sensitive data section for searchability

* Finish git-filter-branch instructions

* Minor grammatical changes and simplifications.
driversti pushed a commit to jDevTeam/git-flight-rules that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2021
…8hudson#249)

* Explanation of removing large files using bfg

* doctoc applied to removing large files guide

* Remove large files: clean up wording

* Add subheadings to the large file removal section in preparation for git-filter-branch explanation

* large file removal: clean up headings

* large file removal: force push considerations note

* Add word "private" to sensitive data section for searchability

* Finish git-filter-branch instructions

* Minor grammatical changes and simplifications.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants