"G. Sylvie Davies" writes:
> I wonder if there's anything one could do to help those who type "git
> fetch" and still want to enjoy "--force-with-lease"...
The entire idea behind "force-with-lease" is that you plan to later
force update the tip of a branch at the remote to replace the commit
tha
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 6:34 PM, G. Sylvie Davies wrote:
> Right now the default variant does this:
>
>> --force-with-lease alone, without specifying the details, will protect all
>> remote refs that are going to be updated by requiring their current value to
>> be the same as the remote-tracking
Right now the default variant does this:
> --force-with-lease alone, without specifying the details, will protect all
> remote refs that are going to be updated by requiring their current value to
> be the same as the remote-tracking branch we have for them.
The problem is people sometimes run
3 matches
Mail list logo
