It's not only two commits There are more than 10 commits with meaningless commit messages. Please check the commit logs https://github.com/apache/pulsar/tree/branch-2.9-backup
> Prettifying the git commit history isn't a proper reason to do force pushes I don't think it should be `Prettifying` here. You are not able to grep the commit logs with the keyword. It's an error commit message, not an unpretty message. It will be inconvenient for users to check whether the fix is backported to branch-2.9. If we revert all of them, we will see 20~30 unreasonable commits. And the commit only happened these days, and we don't have a release for it. I think it makes sense to correct it before we release it. Otherwise, the error commits message will persist for a long time. Additionally, we have a backup for branch-2.9. This does not mean that I support force push to branch at any time. For some occasional cases, I think we can talk case by case. Thanks, Penghui On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 3:21 PM Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 to what Michael said. > > If an invalid commit gets pushed into one of the public branches, it will > simply need to be reverted. Prettifying the git commit history isn't a > proper reason to do force pushes. There could be special exceptions, such > as when someone accidentally pushes confidential information in the git > repository. That wasn't the case this time. I hope that the next time that > there's a need for force pushes that priv...@pulsar.apache.org is > consulted first. > > -Lari > > On 2022/11/28 22:51:18 Michael Marshall wrote: > > I do not think we should have done a force push to rewrite two commit > > messages. The problematic messages had commit hashes in their names, > > so it was easy enough to figure out what went wrong and how to find > > the original commit. If it was really important to fix the messages, I > > think we should have reverted the problematic commits and re-done the > > cherry pick with the desired commit messages. > > > > I also do not think we should allow force pushing to release branches > > or to master branch in the future. In my opinion, the git history > > should be immutable. > > > > Thanks, > > Michael > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 11:39 PM 丛搏 <bog...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > +3 binding(Penghui Li, JiWei guo, Hang Chen) +2 nonbing(Zike Yang, > > > Yubiao Feng), so I will close this discussion and merge > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18623. thanks for your votes. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > bo > > > > > > 丛搏 <congbobo...@gmail.com> 于2022年11月25日周五 18:55写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One thing I'd like to make clear: this is a temporary solution, > and we'll re-enable branch protection after the actions are performed (or > relax to 2.9.4 released). > > > > yes, after this pr: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18623 > merged > > > > and reset branch-2.9 to commit 5ed247de3a, I will push a new PR to > the > > > > master branch to open the branch-2.9 force push > > > > > > > > > > If it's the case, please file an issue and assign yourself to > revert on time :) > > > > if no one is against it in 24 hours, this discussion will be approved > > > > then merge https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18623 then reset > > > > branch-2.9 to commit 5ed247de3a > > >
