Re: [PATCH 7/7] push: document --lockref

>> Or perhaps you were implicitly assuming that "--lockref" would
>> automatically mean "I know I am rewinding, so as soon as I say
>> --lockref, I mean --allow-no-ff", and I did not realize that.
>
> That's what I mean, sort of. Because of your 4 cases of a ref update, I
> do not think that
>
>> 3. The update fast-forwards, but the ref to be updated is not at the
>>    expected place; or
>
> is important to consider. The point of --lockref is to avoid data loss,
> but if the push is fast-forward, there is no data loss.
>
>> If that is the semantics you are proposing, then I think it makes
>> sense to make "--force" the big red button that lets anything go.