Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] remote-hg: force remote push
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Apr 4, 2013, 16:44 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vip42jldt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <1365089422-8250-12-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Ideally we shouldn't do this, as it's not recommended in mercurial > documentation, but there's no other way to push multiple bookmarks (on > the same branch), which would be the behavior most similar to git. > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> > ---
In the previous round you wanted me to exclude this one to force split head at the remote, and I saw you and Max Horn discussing (rather, shouting at each other ;-) why it is needed/desirable.
Have you changed your mind and you want this as part of the series, or is it just you forgot to exclude it?
Show 16 quoted lines
> contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg b/contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg > index b54de1e..b784c54 100755 > --- a/contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg > +++ b/contrib/remote-helpers/git-remote-hg > @@ -722,7 +722,7 @@ def do_export(parser): > continue > > if peer: > - parser.repo.push(peer, force=False) > + parser.repo.push(peer, force=True) > > # handle bookmarks > for bmark, node in p_bmarks: