{"thread":{"id":"29138","subject":"Re: [PATCH] tag deletions not rejected with receive.denyDeletes= true","startedAt":"2011-12-12T14:06:06Z","lastAt":"2011-12-12T17:16:44Z","messageCount":2,"participants":["Jerome DE VIVIE","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"180928","messageId":"12967682.2821323698766430.JavaMail.root@promailix.prometil.com","threadId":"29138","inReplyTo":"6271653.2751323698446271.JavaMail.root@promailix.prometil.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] tag deletions not rejected with receive.denyDeletes= true","fromName":"Jerome DE VIVIE","fromEmail":"j.devivie@prometil.com","sentAt":"2011-12-12T14:06:06Z","receivedAt":"2011-12-12T14:06:06Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"j.devivie@prometil.com","avatar":null},"body":"\nJunio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes :\n> Our documentation can also use some updates, as it dates to the days back\n> when we more liberally used \"refs\" and \"branches\" interchangeably.\n\nOk, I have turned the patch below for documentation.\n\nFor protecting tags, I can do it with triggers but its painful with lots of repositories. I propose to extend receive.denyDeletes with these values:\n- \"false\"/\"none\" (existing behavior)\n- \"true\"/\"branches\" (existing behavior)\n- \"tags\": protect tags only\n- \"all\": protect both tags and branches\n\nYour opinion ?\n\nBR\nJérôme\n\n\nSigned-off-by: Jerome de Vivie <jedevivie-ext@airfrance.fr>\n---\n Documentation/config.txt |    2 +-\n 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt\nindex 5a841da..9c7c7fe 100644\n--- a/Documentation/config.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/config.txt\n@@ -1642,7 +1642,7 @@ receive.unpackLimit::\n \n receive.denyDeletes::\n \tIf set to true, git-receive-pack will deny a ref update that deletes\n-\tthe ref. Use this to prevent such a ref deletion via a push.\n+\ta branch. Use this to prevent such a branch deletion via a push.\n \n receive.denyDeleteCurrent::\n \tIf set to true, git-receive-pack will deny a ref update that\n-- \n1.7.6.msysgit.0\n"},{"id":"180937","messageId":"7v62hl677n.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org","threadId":"29138","inReplyTo":"12967682.2821323698766430.JavaMail.root@promailix.prometil.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] tag deletions not rejected with receive.denyDeletes= true","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2011-12-12T17:16:44Z","receivedAt":"2011-12-12T17:16:44Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Jerome DE VIVIE <j.devivie@prometil.com> writes:\n\n> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes :\n>> Our documentation can also use some updates, as it dates to the days back\n>> when we more liberally used \"refs\" and \"branches\" interchangeably.\n>\n> Ok, I have turned the patch below for documentation.\n\nErr,.. what I meant by \"documentation update\" is more like this.\n\n Documentation/config.txt |    8 ++++----\n 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt\nindex 8a7d2d4..8eda8e4 100644\n--- a/Documentation/config.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/config.txt\n@@ -1653,15 +1653,15 @@ receive.unpackLimit::\n \t`transfer.unpackLimit` is used instead.\n \n receive.denyDeletes::\n-\tIf set to true, git-receive-pack will deny a ref update that deletes\n-\tthe ref. Use this to prevent such a ref deletion via a push.\n+\tIf set to true, git-receive-pack will deny an update that deletes\n+\tthe branch. Use this to prevent a push from deleting a branch.\n \n receive.denyDeleteCurrent::\n-\tIf set to true, git-receive-pack will deny a ref update that\n+\tIf set to true, git-receive-pack will deny an update that\n \tdeletes the currently checked out branch of a non-bare repository.\n \n receive.denyCurrentBranch::\n-\tIf set to true or \"refuse\", git-receive-pack will deny a ref update\n+\tIf set to true or \"refuse\", git-receive-pack will deny an update\n \tto the currently checked out branch of a non-bare repository.\n \tSuch a push is potentially dangerous because it brings the HEAD\n \tout of sync with the index and working tree. If set to \"warn\",\n"}]}