From e442aeb67b9e254ba588cd134efbc2764edbfdc6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "http://id.clacke.se/" <clacke@web>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 21:59:28 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] mention `migrate` and make what is hopefully some
 clarification

---
 doc/bugs/feature_request:_addhash.mdwn | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/doc/bugs/feature_request:_addhash.mdwn b/doc/bugs/feature_request:_addhash.mdwn
index abafa52895..78e132d0a6 100644
--- a/doc/bugs/feature_request:_addhash.mdwn
+++ b/doc/bugs/feature_request:_addhash.mdwn
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ I have a big repo of files I have added using `addurl --fast`. I download the fi
 
 ### Workaround
 
-In both these cases, what I can do is unlock (maybe?) or unannex (definitely) all of the files, and then re-add them using the new hash. In both cases this means I now risk having duplicates in various clones of the repo, and would have to clean them up with `drop-unused` -- after first having re-copied them from a repo that has them under the new hash. I also lose the continuity of the history of that object.
+In both these cases, what I can do is <del>unlock (maybe?) or unannex (definitely) all of the files, and then re-add them using the new hash</del> use `migrate` to relink the files using the new scheme. In both use cases this means I now risk having duplicates in various clones of the repo, and would have to clean them up with `drop-unused` -- after first having re-copied them from a repo that has them under the new hash or `migrate`d them in each clone using the pre-migration commit; Either way is problematic for special remotes, in particular glacier. I also lose the continuity of the history of that object.
 
 In use case 2 I also lose the URLs of the files and would have to re-add them using `addurl`.