Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] doc: add reference for "--[no-]force-if-includes"

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 14, 2020, 21:01 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzh5s1398.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200913145413.18351-7-shrinidhi.kaushik@gmail.com>

Srinidhi Kaushik <shrinidhi.kaushik@gmail.com> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> diff --git a/Documentation/git-push.txt b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> index 3b8053447e..b40fe7e7cf 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-push.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> @@ -320,6 +320,12 @@ seen and are willing to overwrite, then rewrite history, and finally
>  force push changes to `master` if the remote version is still at
>  `base`, regardless of what your local `remotes/origin/master` has been
>  updated to in the background.
> ++
> +Alternatively, specifying `--force-if-includes` an an ancillary option along
> +with `--force-with-lease[=<refname>[:expect]]` (when "<refname>" or "<expect>"
> +values are unspecified) at the time of `push` will verify if updates from the
> +remote-tracking refs that may have been implicitly updated in the background
> +are integrated locally before allowing a forced update.

You cannot omit <refname> without omitting <expect>, so

	... with "--force-with-lease[=<refname>]" (i.e. without
	saying what exact commit the ref on the remote side must be
	pointing at, or which refs on the remote side are being
	protected) at the time of ...

would be more appropriate.

Show 7 quoted lines

> +--[no-]force-if-includes::
> +	Force an update only if the tip of the remote-tracking ref
> +	has been integrated locally.
> ++
> +This option verifies if the tip of the remote-tracking ref on which
> +a local branch has based on (for a rewrite), is reachable from at
> +least one of the `reflog` entries of the local branch about to be

If we take the "we don't have to look at a local branch's reflog; just check HEAD's and rebase will automatically be handled without expensive merge-base" approach, then

    ... if the tip of the remote-tracking ref was once checked out
    to the working tree (for a rewrite) by seeing if it appears in
    the reflog of "HEAD" ...