# Short form of --force-with-lease 7 messages from 2024-04-11 to 2024-04-12. Participants: Wyatt Carpenter, Kipras Melnikovas, rsbecker@nexbridge.com, Kyle Lippincott, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/61309 ## Wyatt Carpenter, 2024-04-11 17:16 Subject: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/CADwVmK293eQ5VFkn-J68tXQ%3D64u3H79ScMW7H_ukSmtwLwA4wA%40mail.gmail.com ``` I often use git push --force-with-lease; it does exactly what I need. Is there a short form of the flag, like -f is for --force? If not, I would like to propose -l be added as one. I don't believe git push has an -l flag currently, and l is of course the first letter of lease. ``` ## Kipras Melnikovas, 2024-04-11 17:36 Subject: Re: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: <20240411173639.81152-2-kipras@kipras.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20240411173639.81152-2-kipras%40kipras.org In-Reply-To: ``` I have also thought about this. I'd suggest a config option "push.forceFlagBehavior" that would allow to configure the behavior, one of: - "default" / "overwrite", which is currently -f, - "lease" for --force-with-lease, - "lease-includes" for --force-with-lease --force-if-includes, - possibly others. Then, upon `git push -f`, the config option would be consulted to determine the behavior. To get the default behavior, `-f -f` or `-F` could be used. ``` ## rsbecker@nexbridge.com, 2024-04-11 19:21 Subject: RE: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: <01e101da8c45$66d33240$347996c0$@nexbridge.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/01e101da8c45%2466d33240%24347996c0%24%40nexbridge.com In-Reply-To: <20240411173639.81152-2-kipras@kipras.org> ``` On Thursday, April 11, 2024 1:37 PM, Kipras Melnikovas wrote: >I'd suggest a config option "push.forceFlagBehavior" that would allow to configure >the behavior, one of: >- "default" / "overwrite", which is currently -f, >- "lease" for --force-with-lease, >- "lease-includes" for --force-with-lease --force-if-includes, >- possibly others. > >Then, upon `git push -f`, the config option would be consulted to determine the >behavior. > >To get the default behavior, `-f -f` or `-F` could be used. If this is mostly about saving typing, you could get a similar effect adding an alias. Something like git config --global alias.pushfl 'push --force-with-lease' ``` ## Kipras Melnikovas, 2024-04-11 20:32 Subject: Re: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: <20240411203225.82557-2-kipras@kipras.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20240411203225.82557-2-kipras%40kipras.org In-Reply-To: <01e101da8c45$66d33240$347996c0$@nexbridge.com> ``` > If this is mostly about saving typing, you could get a similar effect adding > an alias. Something like > > git config --global alias.pushfl 'push --force-with-lease' Correct, and I already have an alias: 'pf = push --force-with-lease --force-if-includes'. However, I see the config option more valuable - it would protect against accidental `push -f`, which, out of habit, is very probable to run on accident. With the config option, would feel safe and wouldn't need the alias either. Thanks. ``` ## Kyle Lippincott, 2024-04-11 20:58 Subject: Re: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/CAO_smVhB0QUomdSxGqwvFKrb53NGMZE%2By%3D3zbRnQX%2BciLRZyOw%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20240411203225.82557-2-kipras@kipras.org> ``` On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 1:34 PM Kipras Melnikovas wrote: > > > If this is mostly about saving typing, you could get a similar effect adding > > an alias. Something like > > > > git config --global alias.pushfl 'push --force-with-lease' > > Correct, and I already have an alias: > 'pf = push --force-with-lease --force-if-includes'. > > However, I see the config option more valuable - it would protect against > accidental `push -f`, which, out of habit, is very probable to run on accident. > With the config option, would feel safe and wouldn't need the alias either. It would normalize the use of `push -f` in people's muscle memory, which would be a potential disaster if someone lost their configuration, but not this muscle memory. It also would break automation/scripts - `git push` is likely used by both humans and automation (custom one-off automation like a personal script, or automation shared by many people) - if they're expecting `git push -f` to do the legacy behavior, then it'll break things if the meaning of `-f` changes. A separate flag (or just using an alias if it's for saving typing) would be safer. > > Thanks. > > ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2024-04-11 21:30 Subject: Re: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqq7ch3r3i3.fsf%40gitster.g In-Reply-To: <01e101da8c45$66d33240$347996c0$@nexbridge.com> ``` writes: > If this is mostly about saving typing, you could get a similar effect adding > an alias. Something like > > git config --global alias.pushfl 'push --force-with-lease' The use of --force-with-lease without specifying which commit you took lease on is not all that safe [*], so I am not sure how useful such an alias will be. Configuring how "--force" behaves and changing it to an unadorned "--force-with-lease" is to promote a not-so-safe feature as if it is safe with false sense of safety, which is not something we would want to do. [Footnote] * This of course highly depends on your workflow and third-party companion tools. If you (or your IDE in the background) fetch from the remote after you started working on the commit to be force-pushed, it would update the tip of the remote-tracking branch, making --force-with-lease base its decision on a wrong commit that your work is not based on. ``` ## Kipras Melnikovas, 2024-04-12 09:00 Subject: Re: Short form of --force-with-lease Message-ID: <20240412090035.87612-2-kipras@kipras.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20240412090035.87612-2-kipras%40kipras.org In-Reply-To: ``` > > > If this is mostly about saving typing, you could get a similar effect adding > > > an alias. Something like > > > > > > git config --global alias.pushfl 'push --force-with-lease' > > > > Correct, and I already have an alias: > > 'pf = push --force-with-lease --force-if-includes'. > > > > However, I see the config option more valuable - it would protect against > > accidental `push -f`, which, out of habit, is very probable to run on accident. > > With the config option, would feel safe and wouldn't need the alias either. > > It would normalize the use of `push -f` in people's muscle memory, > which would be a potential disaster if someone lost their > configuration, but not this muscle memory. It also would break > automation/scripts - `git push` is likely used by both humans and > automation <...>. A separate flag (or just using an alias if it's for > saving typing) would be safer. Fair point, I retract my config option proposal. A separate flag, as proposed by OP, would make more sense. Thanks. ```