Re: git-svn confused by "empty" (svn prop change) commit

paulfred [off-list ref] writes:

Other (perhaps important) details: I created the repository several months
ago,and only recently put "[svn] noMetadata = true" in my config file because
I'm the only person on the team using git, and nobody else wanted to see the
git-svn-id messages.

Okay, I see that I missed in the documentation where it says setting noMetadata
"must be done *before* any history is imported and these settings should never
be changed once they are set.  User error.

I suppose I could nuke everything and clone another shallow copy of the code
from some point after the bad commit, but I'd be happy with any kind of
work around that gets me dcommitting again.

So, that is what I tried to do today, only it doesn't appear to work either!
Here's what I tried in more detail:

$ git svn init -T http://project.com/svn/trunk project --no-metadata

Then I edited my config to look like this:

[svn-remote "svn"]
            noMetadata = 1
            url = http://project.com/svn
            fetch = trunk/dev:refs/remotes/trunk

only changing the fetch line (I don't want to track web pages, etc. which
are also under trunk).  Followed by:

$ git svn fetch --revision 1156
$ git svn fetch
  (now it actually pulls everything since 1156 and checks out master)
  [hack, hack, hack]
$ git svn rebase
Unable to determine upstream SVN information from working tree history

at which point I realize I am probably screwed.  But I try it anyway,
since svn tells me no one else has checked anything in yet:

$ git svn dcommit
Unable to determine upstream SVN information from HEAD history.
Perhaps the repository is empty. at /usr/local/libexec/git-core/git-svn line 435.

So apparently my problem is NOT the empty commit at all, but trying to use
noMetadata.  I am surprised that it fails on a fresh download though. Is there
something I might have done while hacking that would cause git-svn to lose
track of trunk again?  Is my only option to convince everyone to ignore
the "noise" in my comments?

Thanks,

--Paul