You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@couchdb.apache.org by Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com> on 2012/02/05 02:32:55 UTC
Re: Git Push Summary
What happened here? Why forced?
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update)
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com>.
Funny, I was thinking of an informal custom but I very much appreciate
your investigation about codifying it.
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Possible but I'm not sure how easily/sanely I could codify that grace
> period into a Git hook. Our release branches are supposed to be
> unmodifiable (as well as not allow merges) but the configuration
> hasn't been updated in regards to our release procedure decisions.
> I'll get to that later today hopefully.
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com> wrote:
>> The Git history is source code too. Reading and comprehending is key.
>> We spend as much or more time reading Git logs as building new ones.
>>
>> FWIW (not much) I would prefer a few minutes grace period where people
>> can push --force, rather than a tangled git history conveying no
>> information except that somebody made an error.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Noah managed to merge 1.2.x to itself. I caught it in a few minutes so
>>> made a snap decision and fixed it. I plan on fixing up the hooks
>>> tomorrow to prevent it from happening again.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This is not the commit you are looking for.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What happened here? Why forced?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Updated Branches:
>>>>>> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Iris Couch
--
Iris Couch
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com>.
Possible but I'm not sure how easily/sanely I could codify that grace
period into a Git hook. Our release branches are supposed to be
unmodifiable (as well as not allow merges) but the configuration
hasn't been updated in regards to our release procedure decisions.
I'll get to that later today hopefully.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com> wrote:
> The Git history is source code too. Reading and comprehending is key.
> We spend as much or more time reading Git logs as building new ones.
>
> FWIW (not much) I would prefer a few minutes grace period where people
> can push --force, rather than a tangled git history conveying no
> information except that somebody made an error.
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Noah managed to merge 1.2.x to itself. I caught it in a few minutes so
>> made a snap decision and fixed it. I plan on fixing up the hooks
>> tomorrow to prevent it from happening again.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is not the commit you are looking for.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> What happened here? Why forced?
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Updated Branches:
>>>>> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update)
>
>
>
> --
> Iris Couch
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com>.
The Git history is source code too. Reading and comprehending is key.
We spend as much or more time reading Git logs as building new ones.
FWIW (not much) I would prefer a few minutes grace period where people
can push --force, rather than a tangled git history conveying no
information except that somebody made an error.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Noah managed to merge 1.2.x to itself. I caught it in a few minutes so
> made a snap decision and fixed it. I plan on fixing up the hooks
> tomorrow to prevent it from happening again.
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is not the commit you are looking for.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> What happened here? Why forced?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Updated Branches:
>>>> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update)
--
Iris Couch
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com>.
Noah managed to merge 1.2.x to itself. I caught it in a few minutes so
made a snap decision and fixed it. I plan on fixing up the hooks
tomorrow to prevent it from happening again.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is not the commit you are looking for.
>
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What happened here? Why forced?
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Updated Branches:
>>> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update)
Re: Git Push Summary
Posted by Paul Davis <pa...@gmail.com>.
This is not the commit you are looking for.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What happened here? Why forced?
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Updated Branches:
>> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update)