On 2018-04-05, Maarten Coene wrote: > Sorry, I have no idea what this is... should it be reverted?
No, you haven't really changed anything. Your "fix typo" commit was based on a version of the master branch that is older than the HEAD at apache as you didn't update your local copy first. When you tried to push the changes git told you you needed to update your working copy first. For this there are two options: * merge the changes that have happened at Apache with yours - this creates the merge commit you've seen. This is probably the default option, my git setup has been tweaked long ago and I don't trust my local defaults :-) * rebase your changes on top of the version at apache. This would have shown a clean linear history and is what I tend to prefer where possible. rebasing is a bit of an advanced git strategy. The merge commit really only shows as a "diamond" in history. If you look at the commit in gitk or a similar tool you'll see it has two parents: your typo fix and the latest HEAD at apache. It hasn't really changed any files you didn't intend to change, it just shows that your working copy and apache's HEAD have diverted at one point in time. This is seen as noise by some, but really doesn't do any harm beyond that. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
