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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham 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 273CB1F4B4 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 21:00:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726612AbgIJVAY (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:00:24 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51899 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730676AbgIJOqu (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:46:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6DAC74A35; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:46:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=K8rsTQxuC0pCJ0XD6asUWuuKgTg=; b=Q2FrVayIno9eCfc4jKWI X94HlmOMg9i4CreJYiYxtDMNfYgXQn3HJ3bG7JVEfe32U6xHPvXDpto0hf0afRbz myjh9S34zlh+F4CDCiZBEQzBr3FOFE/wqSPXe1A2F/xXpRWWZu/qMRZblBWWtcDk CMbmNJxSDr8jpHu7ftUK+QA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=A9Rs4f9yNrRovVx8HxiKvjsEp26Pu88PgSw19VALFlDBR7 ykaGCebMim3NqjFqnr+gs3B0xwD/wr7HWcTS8AJwxqhXv3OI3Urk7TnW/MbhkHf/ xsX01QM6ENYfiBO9ba9id1fry7xmO41FigYEZKtrum7pfczZA+ldrHe+kpDP8= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF8274A34; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:46:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 597A774A33; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:46:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Srinidhi Kaushik , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] push: make `--force-with-lease[=]` safer References: <20200904185147.77439-1-shrinidhi.kaushik@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 07:46:43 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7212D48E-F374-11EA-BEB5-2F5D23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin 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'.