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

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 9, 2013, 20:37 UTC
Message-ID: <7vhag3v59o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <51DC7199.2050302@kdbg.org>

Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> Am 09.07.2013 21:53, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> +--lockref::
>> +--lockref=<refname>::
>> +--lockref=<refname>:<expect>::
>> ...
>> +This is meant to make `--force` safer to use.
>
> This is a contradiction. "--force" means "I mean it, dude", and not "I
> mean it sometimes". It would make sense if this sentence were "This is
> meant to make `+refspec` safer to use."

No, this *IS* making --force safer by letting you to say in addition to --force alone which is blind, add --lockref to defeat it.

I do not see any good reason to change the samentics of "+refspec" for something like this. "+refspec" and "--force refspec" have meant the same thing forever. If --lockref adds safety to +refspec, the same safety should apply to "--force refspec".

> Do you intend to require users to opt in to safety by saying --lockref
> until the end of time?

For normal users this is *NOT* necessary. I do not know where people are getting the idea of making it default.

Rewinding a branch, needing to --force, is an exceptional case.

> Which makes it actually usable only for scripts
> and aliases. How do you override when the safety triggers, e.g., in an
> alias that uses --force --lockref?

The original request for this feature did come from script writers, who want to spin

	until
                git fetch &&
                ... magic integrate of the ongoing work ... &&
                git push --lockref
	do
        	: spin
	done