Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

> On Sat, Apr 08, 2017 at 02:54:29PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>> > So the best way to use it is something like:
>> >
>> >   git fetch              ;# update 'master' from remote
>> >   git tag base master    ;# mark our base point
>> >   git rebase -i master   ;# rewrite some commits
>> >   git push --force-with-lease=master:base master:master
>> [...]
>>
>> What if we added a separate command something like:
>>
>> git create-lease
>>
>> which you're expected to run at the start of a rewind-y operation and
>> it creates a tag (or some other ref like a tag but in a different
>> namespace) which is used by force-with-lease?
>
> So then you replace that "git tag" command above with "git
> create-lease". I think it's an incremental improvement because it would
> probably record which branch you're leasing. But I think the more
> important issue is that the user needs to remember to take the lease in
> the first place. A create-lease command doesn't help that.
>

>> It might be possible to generate these lease tags prior to operations
>> which modify history and then maybe having a way to list them so you
>> can select which one you meant when you try to use force-with-lease..
>
> So yeah, I think that is the more interesting direction. I hadn't
> considered resolving the multiple-operation ambiguity at push time. But
> I guess it would be something like "you did a rebase on sha1 X at time
> T, and then one on Y at time T+N", and you pick which one you're
> expecting. Or maybe it could even cull old leases that are still
> ancestors of your push (so old, already-pushed rebases aren't
> mentioned). I suspect that ends up being equivalent to "clear the leases
> when you push". And I think that may be converging on the "integrate"
> refs that Stefan is talking about elsewhere (or some isomorphism of it).
>
> -Peff