Service disruption: git converter currently down

[Ed Maste]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 10:53, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
> But this really was a merge from stable/10 into master,

I think this is just a question of semantics, not VCS details - I
would argue that it is not a merge in the ordinary sense of the word,
and is certainly not a merge in the git sense. You're right that this
should be represented in history as if it were a cherry pick. Bogusly
adding over 9000 commits to the history is definitely not the "least
wrong" thing the conversion could do.

git log --first-parent isn't really a solution here either, because
there are cases where one legitimately does want history from both
parents, especially working in downstream projects.

> I'd offer the opinion that needing to know about things like git log --first-parent vs having to rebase every single downstream fork,

We won't need to rebase every fork - in no case should the path
forward be worse than uqs's suggestion of a merge from both old/new
conversions.