Re: How to get rid of doubled branch after renaming a branch in svn-repository

pacco@tropezien.de venit, vidit, dixit 01.12.2010 13:48:

 Hi,

 I'm using git-svn as a tracking-tool for a Subversion repository.
 I currently detected an unexpected branch, seeming dead, but visible 
 using 'git branch -a'. I checked the svn log and saw that someone has 
 moved/renamed a branch. That results in a deletion of the old branch and 
 an adding of a copy of the old branch with the new branch name.

 The scenario is like that:

 $ git branch -a
 * master
   remotes/svnrepos/git-svn-test

 # Rename the branch (move) in the SVN-repos
 $ svn mv https://svn.repos/branches/git-svn-test 
 https://svn.repos/branches/git-svn-test-new

 # Update git-repository
 $ git svn fetch

 $ git branch -a
 * master
   remotes/svnrepos/git-svn-test
   remotes/svnrepos/git-svn-test-new

 You see the problem. Within Subversion simply a new repository version 
 now no longer "showing" the git-svn-test-branch was created. But within 
 git both branches stay visible.
 Well, I know that renaming a branch is really not that favoured action.
 But I expected that git-svn gathers also this deletion and removes the 
 obsolete branch.

 So, am I doing something wrong? Or am I expecting the wrong behaviour? 
 Or is that simply a feature, not a bug, and must be handled manually?

Branches in svn and git are different. If you delete a branch in svn,
the "content" is still there in the sense that it is there in previous
revisions. You only delete a pointer in your svn-filesystem.

In git, a branch points at a commit, and deleting a branch means making
that commit pointerless (unless it is pointed to by other branches or
tags). So far there's some similarity. But now, if that commit and all
its descendants are "pointerless" (can't be reached from a named ref)
git will garbage collect them after a while. They're considered pointless ;)

svn records the rename as a copy+delete (it also sets some rename info
which git-svn seems to ignore). So, git-svn stays on the safe side by
keeping the branch. Note that deleting the branch would possibly delete
at least some info since the branch name is not recorded in the commit
(if you use svn.noMetadata).

You can safely delete the branch if you're sure its head commit is
contained in some other branch (as will be for an ordinary rename).

Michael