git-lfs
bfg-repo-cleaner
Our great sponsors
git-lfs | bfg-repo-cleaner | |
---|---|---|
159 | 53 | |
12,405 | 10,630 | |
1.2% | - | |
9.1 | 1.5 | |
15 days ago | 8 days ago | |
Go | Scala | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | GNU General Public License v3.0 only |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
git-lfs
-
Git-annex: manage large files in Git without storing the contents in Git
What's the difference between this and Git-LFS?
- Twenty Years Is Nothing
-
Aho – a Git implementation in Awk
It doesn't, since Git's data model has to be changed to content-defined chunks to solve the issue.
You should look at git-lfs[1] instead.
-
Launch HN: Diversion (YC S22) – Cloud-Native Git Alternative
Congrats on the HN launch. How does this improve or expand or blow git-lfs[1] out of the water because if I needed large blob file support it's what I would use instead. It offers pointers to the big files to the hosted git instead of pushing around the binaries itself -- though I am speculating since I've not used it myself just read about it online.
-
Ask HN: How do you keep your documentation, how-to, examples and blogs updated?
Specifics depend on project types, but literate programming[0] and using/enforcing coding/git/versioning standards helps. re: outdated responses -- email list for 'new/updated version available' with errata/change log location.
[0] : https://blog.bitsrc.io/literate-programming-a-radical-approa...
[1] : https://blog.codacy.com/coding-standards
[2] : https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/blob/main/.github/workflo...
-
Ask HN: Can we do better than Git for version control?
fine with layers: e.g., large binary files via git-lfs (https://git-lfs.com) and merge conflicts in non-textual files by custom merge resolvers like Unity’s (https://flashg.github.io/GitMerge-for-Unity/).
Perhaps in the future, almost everyone will keep using Git at the core, but have so many layers to make it more intuitive and provide better merges, that what they’re using barely resembles Git at all. This flexibility and the fact that nearly everything is designed for Git and integrates with Git, are why I doubt it’s ever going away.
Some alternatives for thought:
- pijul (https://pijul.org), a completely different VCS which allegedly has better merges/rebases. In beta, but I rarely hear about it nowadays and have heard more bad than good. I don’t think we can implement this alternate rebases in Git, but maybe we don’t need to; even after reading the website, I don’t understand why pijul’s merges are better, and in particular I can’t think of a concrete example nor does pijul provide one.
- Unison (https://www.unison-lang.org). This isn’t a VCS, but a language with a radical approach to code representation: instead of code being text stored in files, code is ASTs referenced by hash and stored in essentially a database. Among other advantages, the main one is that you can rename symbols and they will automatically propagate to dependencies, because the symbols are referenced by their hash instead of their name. I believe this automatic renaming will be common in the future, whether it’s implemented by a layer on top of Git or alternate code representation like Unison (to be clear, Unison’s codebases are designed to work with Git, and the Unison project itself is stored in Git repos).
- SVN, the other widespread VCS. Google or ask ChatGPT “Git vs SVN” and you’ll get answers like this (https://www.linode.com/docs/guides/svn-vs-git/, https://stackoverflow.com/a/875). Basically, SVN is easier to understand and handles large files better, Git is decentralized and more popular. But what about the differences which can’t be resolved by layers, like lazygit for intuition and git-lfs for large files? It seems to me like even companies with centralized private repositories use Git, meaning Git will probably win in the long term, but I don’t work at those companies so I don’t really know.
- Mercurial and Fossil, the other widespread VCSs. It seems these are more similar to Git and the main differences are in the low-level implementation (https://stackoverflow.com/a/892688, https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki#....). It actually seems like most people prefer Mercurial and Fossil over Git and would use them if they had the same popularity, or at least if they had Git’s popularity and Git had Mercury or Fossil’s. But again, these VCSs are so similar that with layers, you can probably create a Git experience which has their advantages and almost copies their UI.
- We Put Half a Million Files in One Git Repository, Here's What We Learned (2022)
-
Show HN: Gogit – Just enough Git (in Go) to push itself to GitHub
> I don’t know what that is
its a standard output from `go doc`, rendered as HTML. if you dont recognize that, then you aren't really in a position to be commenting on the topic. nothing is stopping anyone from pinning to a tag:
https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/tags
or even a commit and relying of a specific version of the software. yes upgrades might be painful but a module IS available.
-
Unable to push because of large file deleted in the past
# git push origin feature-branch /usr/bin/gh auth git-credential get: 1: /usr/bin/gh auth git-credential get: /usr/bin/gh: not found /usr/bin/gh auth git-credential store: 1: /usr/bin/gh auth git-credential store: /usr/bin/gh: not found Enumerating objects: 9228, done. Counting objects: 100% (7495/7495), done. Delta compression using up to 8 threads Compressing objects: 100% (2090/2090), done. Writing objects: 100% (6033/6033), 72.77 MiB | 7.39 MiB/s, done. Total 6033 (delta 4402), reused 5194 (delta 3616) remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (4402/4402), completed with 477 local objects. remote: error: Trace: c1c90b47a5483929dcdd8c974a6c7d0695e86f67f680d8b88b80ef1c1bce74a remote: error: See https://gh.io/lfs for more information. remote: error: File deployment_20200220.sql is 872.78 MB; this exceeds GitHub's file size limit of 100.00 MB remote: error: GH001: Large files detected. You may want to try Git Large File Storage - https://git-lfs.github.com. To https://github.com/my-org/my-project.git ! [remote rejected] rest-logging -> rest-logging (pre-receive hook declined) error: failed to push some refs to 'https://github.com/my-org/my-project.git'
- What and Why, Git LFS?
bfg-repo-cleaner
-
(RE not sharing inputs) PSA: "deleting" and committing to git doesn't actually remove it
So, this is a PSA that you can't simply delete the file and commit that. You must either use a tool like BFG Repo Cleaner which can scrub files out of your commit history or you could simply delete your repository and recreate it (easier, but you lose your commit history).
-
How do you handle the different repositories in CI?
It shouldn't take a lot of time to modify. There is even a tool just for this scenario https://rtyley.github.io/bfg-repo-cleaner/
- What Is BFG?
- What is in that .git directory?
-
someThingsAreForever
You need to git out the BFG: https://rtyley.github.io/bfg-repo-cleaner/
-
How can I mirror a folder in my repo to another repo?
This method requires changes to be committed as usual in the regular project repository, and then committed again in the -docs repository. This is inelegant, but it provides clear distinction between private and public content. You cannot publish your regular repository without using git-filter-branch or some Git history rewriting software like BFG Repo-Cleaner. This would rewrite every commit in the history of the repo, removing all changes to the paths you don't wish to publish. This would change all the commit hashes and possibly other metadata – in short, it wouldn't be the same repository.
-
please help i accidentally added all my user files on my git source control how to revert that? it says it will delete all the files forever and you cannot recover them. Any solution at all please?
GFG Repo-Cleaner
- How to remove sensitive file from origin history?
-
Nintendo sends Valve DMCA notice to block Steam release of Wii emulator Dolphin
You could use a repo filtering tool (e.g. BFG Repo-Cleaner) to clean up unintended information leak from your Git repository -- which retains the history timeline, but I believe it would rehash all the commits and render everything unsigned, which is probably not the desired outcome.
- BFG Repo-Cleaner – Removes large or troublesome blobs from Git
What are some alternatives?
onedrive - OneDrive Client for Linux
git-filter-repo - Quickly rewrite git repository history (filter-branch replacement)
git-fat - Simple way to handle fat files without committing them to git, supports synchronization using rsync
gitignore - A collection of useful .gitignore templates
Gitea - Git with a cup of tea! Painless self-hosted all-in-one software development service, including Git hosting, code review, team collaboration, package registry and CI/CD
git-secret - :busts_in_silhouette: A bash-tool to store your private data inside a git repository.
git - A fork of Git containing Windows-specific patches.
github-cheat-sheet - A list of cool features of Git and GitHub.
nixpkgs - Nix Packages collection & NixOS
scalar - Scalar: A set of tools and extensions for Git to allow very large monorepos to run on Git without a virtualization layer
sops - Simple and flexible tool for managing secrets