I think you could still delete remote tag and retag and push, instead of doing
a force push?
But yeah, if this is needed we should keep things as it is.
I just wanted to bring this issue to everyone and see if we should do something
about it.
On 01-Sep-2014, at 2:04 pm, Leo Simons wrote:
> On
On Aug 30, 2014, at 3:15 AM, David Nalley wrote:
> You can ask/make the recommendation that the foundation disable force
> pushes across all branches of all repositories at the foundation. That
> may actually make a lot of sense. But I don't know that everyone will
> agree. (I tend to concur, I ca
Rajani, I agree that moving tags is not best practice but with our release
candidate custom it is better then not tagging until certain.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Rajani Karuturi wrote:
> If force push is disabled, feature branches wont be able to rebase on
> master directly unless they
If force push is disabled, feature branches wont be able to rebase on
master directly unless they create a temp branch or do a merge.[1]
Moving tags aren't recommended. see discussion on "Re-tagging" in git-tag
man page [2]
[1]
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8939977/git-push-rejected-after-fe
On 01-Sep-2014, at 9:55 am, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> I worry that disabling force push will inhibit moving tags and deleting
> branches, two thing I definately want to keep on doing.
I’ve worked on git hooks before, and you can still be able to delete tags and
branches if we were to disable forc
I worry that disabling force push will inhibit moving tags and deleting
branches, two thing I definately want to keep on doing.
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 3:15 AM, David Nalley wrote:
> Projects do not have the ability to specify their own hooks. You
> essentially get the same set as every other p
Projects do not have the ability to specify their own hooks. You
essentially get the same set as every other project in the Foundation
using git. The reasons behind this are that essentially projects would
have an incredibly divergent set of hooks, they would be
unmaintainable long term. Infra has
+1 on disable force push.
On 8/29/14, 8:39 AM, Nate Gordon wrote:
+1 Rewrite history on a public repo opens the door for very catastrophic
situations.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Ian Duffy wrote:
So, I’m told that we need to discuss this issue and only after a
decision/voting they wou
Hi David,
On 29-Aug-2014, at 6:59 pm, David Nalley wrote:
> force pushes on master are already prohibited.
> The other branches allow that though.
We already know this. The discussion is;
1. Should we put git hooks to prevent force pushes on all branches? (people
would be still able to delete
force pushes on master are already prohibited.
The other branches allow that though.
--David
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I found by accident that you can force push on branches on our ACS/ASF repo.
>
> So, I’m concerned that anyone could do a force push, sne
+1 Rewrite history on a public repo opens the door for very catastrophic
situations.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Ian Duffy wrote:
> > So, I’m told that we need to discuss this issue and only after a
> decision/voting they would implement such a change? What do you think, what
> are the pro
> So, I’m told that we need to discuss this issue and only after a
decision/voting they would implement such a change? What do you think, what
are the pros and cons of disabling force pushes and should we do it?
Definitely a +1 on disabling. forced pushing in my view should be never
used on a publ
Hi all,
I found by accident that you can force push on branches on our ACS/ASF repo.
So, I’m concerned that anyone could do a force push, sneak in changes on
ACS/ASF branches; opensource projects have had issues with people changing
histories, putting backdoors and whatnot, so I would like to a
13 matches
Mail list logo
