From: Pierre Habouzit Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:28:01 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-send-pack: don't consider branch lagging behind as errors. Message-ID: <20080619162801.GA2468@artemis.madism.org> In-Reply-To: <20080619151110.GA31654@sigill.intra.peff.net> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 03:11:10PM +0000, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 03:52:00PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > - there is a possible danger with "git push -f", in that you force > > > both rejected branches as well as stale branches. Junio and I > > Well afaict this is a separate issue, as we're (with such a patch) > > only changing what gets printed on the console, not the internal > > behavior. So solving this second issue should not really be a > > precondition to the inclusion of such a patch. > > It is a separate issue, but it is exacerbated by hiding stale refs. > Imagine: > > $ git push > To /path/to/repo > ! [rejected] master -> master (non-fast forward) > > $ git push -f > To /path/to/repo > + 0abfa88...c1ed93b master -> master (forced update) > + 0329485...3498576 stale_branch -> stale_branch (forced update) > > I think that is a nasty surprise to spring on an unsuspecting user. > Another solution might be "-f" not pushing rewound branches, but then we > need a way to specify "no, really, push this rewound branch". Perhaps > "-f -f"? Well then we could keep the [stalled] lines for now until this issue is resolved then, despite what the people at the beginning of the other thread complained about. My real issue is that I have my shell configured so that my prompt becomes inverted if the last command failed. So do many people I know, and well, git push for stalled references should just not generate an error. _this_ is my sole concern :) > > Please please please do :) > > The exit 1 of git-push is really annoying me these days. > > OK, I will try to take a look in the next few days. > > -Peff -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org