From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MALFORMED_FREEMAIL, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45BA51F4B4 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:31:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726430AbgINKa6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:30:58 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:48819 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726275AbgINKa5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:30:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1600079452; bh=l1cvAd4lFVEtoBHEMLviOifBNFtlSza4CyM+v9VgwBQ=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=dpWcX7HRixMBjiANvp9QW1OeqUCDMmuHdhNxKzPvU9en5weQiXczi49UkjIu3PEK7 E2m0ojUYx2oYWTEyaNPhI87RqhnasNhkx9rpa2NtfxvV/+3p7NwoFhfIWZJ00Ik7z1 TzYzU8iifvGwX8eGQF1aQWvp4nXJHd/5PZIwbK24= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [172.17.239.213] ([89.1.213.162]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M6lpM-1k9XU53I3q-008NoJ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 12:30:51 +0200 Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 00:17:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@gitforwindows.org To: Junio C Hamano cc: Srinidhi Kaushik , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] push: make `--force-with-lease[=]` safer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20200904185147.77439-1-shrinidhi.kaushik@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.1 (DEB 209 2017-03-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:40Skmrkw0Tcjlv8btZ9Sx6Lo9L673rjQJv+TDq8H6xGabVvZxJ+ 8eIJp/Gdja9nVJofOVNT78R9PGYc+/q8hWF8VWomGu54FS7wkUb/md25uUzm0ICWYYVaTVw MKKOiayweRqCNPmG6XgHF5n2WNa9ejcieVlEHpgF71KF3XwMoTAdNci8+m69pOXQC++R0PI pRTOGgC0O2gTdtZdlzZOA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:ZyCOk+G1M2I=:tQcV0irKgYNZHBFxSyQAxI L5QFdFiH1ErywEMSCMJJPt9SRbaOdvV6TekxXnKPO3BIv+WMrtdIKrS2HOosCAsmlq2H6Ngqp 9QuFlZNvbP2dMWv65fYzP20zJQgsFXKenAuc/jVBtkcvFDyhJev1tJEumCdvRnEwy8wToTyJ7 Cv+WNAvWji83nBtM/QZ+PNb0a1V9ilxkD7eAzrC7CYnJusFOEflFESsAwzPkCGdhQIhE7DjRl jnrMLYC2xR91NxSlfXlH3bVjqnt9BILt724va/cGTjn8ofEQnzWylAVtF9Lq0feKhnd09HM0z txZ6UKn17DiDUiHGn5djIKXsMT3vcJFBsSI5KyVE+f0IWm/1dSdTYJsgJXp0EMZwwim/DPb7c tFW0um7yGkUxxCYAQCpk1uZKLVX05eKL4Bc371OoPijuvhOMaCDd6IxstEU2PVKvt6g0TrnzJ 7lsxK5pRRHpcvWjV2cD8OJ6rRzxKo0NazkrGRSWK1PJ1Qj0nznzw6e3xpiA3OT2yedH0WMKBY ZjIy+j4szCEbrZzJTiTi/2XvDxnbcnCzGdmTq4nSLpRgPpmMDQ5LmhGUrJ4sVdfZEsOEl4isC DDCDFPbR7+MP8NISnYMDkif2LGOxL3Xn++TyZ0lBmO+h0hqZ4FYP7TkRs/WVEvdbvI0mJLSfJ AVPOQYw+IdcsvUcdQlJgGAu5SlS0s1ebqzY1e2LvlTU8vX+UKiPcQHlA9E/QRaVr7ja1W1TiZ oLJ1W/NrKgonJk7UKwqpAs55pPWKhQUfzBphOWVV3aECp9a7H6qsCXHdExR02HqgbyB2rP2wj /9ExM5FtADQPlTKXAbjw5FRo4bHxwgiO1OGZTeNbF3hU5JfXKL4FxMKiD0QZqnAbhXGuM4fqr anbw+p5mAQMGA9B9fKkqA6QVRIzFLg02yYiWxzH5h/xzAVdeU2ZimFy9odD+qJAO6lDw5tKWx 4fDnhJB7cyQpoQaN7WNEbAo2YplIYlhBTDZDQBshnzv252OxZyUWEI1LQsPgGVqwRbmrZOcgj ty2mP4QkH8KXn94T8h/sCNvS+SNoQUma9LnVuALP4ZyupvN+HYzACMEA+yZLg4i6SKtMYY8Pt xqJD5V+MUHm22O9c1Q7lPLYHtqcO+r1aqqJ/iY1x+n3yszDLT2OBAtGQEdQ0L2XfRBj8Hw++z i/ENmLjKK+cS3uB26J7clg0Dny9HrMRuTvnQa9eb0An7pVj1SyEFSHn4miUmp1Jx3hyKlwrX+ knpZC1KG9fA2xlPu1SX3kQFU6VNIYzXeO49GUMg== Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Junio, On Thu, 10 Sep 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> In contrast, when you want to make sure that you _actually_ incorpora= ted > >> the revision that is currently the remote tip, e.g. via `git pull > >> --rebase` with a possible additional rebase on top that makes this _n= ot_ 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. Thanks, Dscho