I've asked before about how to squash the first two commits in a git repository.
While the solutions are rather interesting and not really as mind-warping as some other things in git, they're still a bit of the proverbial bag of hurt if you need to repeat the procedure many times along the development of your project.
So, I'd rather go through pain only once, and then be able to forever use the standard interactive rebase.
What I want to do, then, is to have an empty initial commit that exists solely for the purpose of being the first. No code, no nothing. Just taking up space so it can be the base for rebase.
My question then is, having an existing repository, how do I go about inserting a new, empty commit before the first one, and shifting everyone else forward?
Best Solution
There are 2 steps to achieving this:
We’ll put the new empty commit on a temporary branch
newroot
for convenience.1. Create a new empty commit
There is a number of ways you can do this.
Using just plumbing
The cleanest approach is to use Git’s plumbing to just create a commit directly, which avoids touching the working copy or the index or which branch is checked out, etc.
Create a tree object for an empty directory:
Wrap a commit around it:
Create a reference to it:
You can of course rearrange the whole procedure into a one-liner if you know your shell well enough.
Without plumbing
With regular porcelain commands, you cannot create an empty commit without checking out the
newroot
branch and updating the index and working copy repeatedly, for no good reason. But some may find this easier to understand:Note that on very old versions of Git that lack the
--orphan
switch tocheckout
, you have to replace the first line with this:2. Rewrite history to start from this empty commit
You have two options here: rebasing, or a clean history rewrite.
Rebasing
This has the virtue of simplicity. However, it will also update the committer name and date on every last commit on the branch.
Also, with some edge case histories, it may even fail due to merge conflicts – despite the fact that you are rebasing onto a commit that contains nothing.
History rewrite
The cleaner approach is to rewrite the branch. Unlike with
git rebase
, you will need to look up which commit your branch starts from:The rewriting happens in the second step, obviously; it’s the first step that needs explanation. What
git replace
does is it tells Git that whenever it sees a reference to an object you want replaced, Git should instead look at the replacement of that object.With the
--graft
switch, you are telling it something slightly different than normally. You are saying don’t have a replacement object yet, but you want to replace the<currentroot>
commit object with an exact copy of itself except the parent commit(s) of the replacement should be the one(s) that you listed (i.e. thenewroot
commit). Thengit replace
goes ahead and creates this commit for you, and then declares that commit as the replacement for your original commit.Now if you do a
git log
, you will see that things already look as you want them to: the branch starts fromnewroot
.However, note that
git replace
does not actually modify history – nor does it propagate out of your repository. It merely adds a local redirect to your repository from one object to another. What this means is that nobody else sees the effect of this replacement – only you.That’s why the
filter-branch
step is necessary. Withgit replace
you create an exact copy with adjusted parent commits for the root commit;git filter-branch
then repeats this process for all the following commits as well. That is where history actually gets rewritten so that you can share it.