Re: [PATCH] push: make `--force-with-lease[=<ref>]` safer

> Hi Junio,
>
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>>
>> >> In contrast, when you want to make sure that you _actually_ incorporated
>> >> the revision that is currently the remote tip, e.g. via `git pull
>> >> --rebase` with a possible additional rebase on top that makes this _not_ a
>> >> fast-forward, you totally have to force the push, otherwise it won't work.
>> >
>> > Maybe `--force-if-incorporated`? Originally, I had in mind to call it
>> > `--safe-force`, but that might be too vague.
>>
>> Yup.  "safe force" indeed feels like a misnomer.  The assumption of
>> safety relies heavily on the workflow.
>>
>> I might even say --force-if-merged even if the way the to-be-lost
>> changes have become part of what you are pushing out is not
>> technically a merge, but there may be shorter and sweeter way to
>> express it than 'merge' and 'incorporate'.
>
> You're right, `--force-if-merged` is a much better way to put it.