[kruador]

It isn't mangled. The commit is there as-is. Instead the repository has a file, ".git/shallow", which tells it not to look for the parents of any commit listed there. If you do a '--depth 1' clone, the file will list the single commit that was retrieved.

This is similar to the 'grafts' feature. Indeed 'git log' says 'grafted'.

You can test this using "git cat-file -p" with the commit that got retrieved, to print the raw object.

> git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/git/git > git log

commit 388218fac77d0405a5083cd4b4ee20f6694609c3 (grafted, HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) Author: Junio C Hamano <[e-mail]> Date: Mon Feb 10 10:18:17 2025 -0800

    The ninth batch

    Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[e-mail]>

> git cat-file -p 388218fac77d0405a5083cd4b4ee20f6694609c3

tree fc620998515e75437810cb1ba80e9b5173458d1c parent 50e1821529fd0a096fe03f137eab143b31e8ef55 author Junio C Hamano <[e-mail]> 1739211497 -0800 committer Junio C Hamano <[e-mail]> 1739211512 -0800

The ninth batch

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[e-mail]>

I can't reproduce the problem pushing to Bitbucket, using the most recent Git for Windows (2.47.1.windows.2). It only sent 3 objects (which would be the blob of the new file, the tree object containing the new file, and the commit object describing the tree), not the 6000+ in the repository I tested it on.

It may be that there was a bug that has now been fixed. Or it may be something that only happens/happened with GitHub (i.e. a bug at the receiving end, not the sending one!)

I note that the Stack Overflow user who wrote the answer left a comment underneath saying

"worth noting: I haven't tested this; it's just some simple applied math. One clone-and-push will tell you if I was right. :-)"