Funny, I was thinking of an informal custom but I very much appreciate your investigation about codifying it.
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > Possible but I'm not sure how easily/sanely I could codify that grace > period into a Git hook. Our release branches are supposed to be > unmodifiable (as well as not allow merges) but the configuration > hasn't been updated in regards to our release procedure decisions. > I'll get to that later today hopefully. > > On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> The Git history is source code too. Reading and comprehending is key. >> We spend as much or more time reading Git logs as building new ones. >> >> FWIW (not much) I would prefer a few minutes grace period where people >> can push --force, rather than a tangled git history conveying no >> information except that somebody made an error. >> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Paul Davis <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Noah managed to merge 1.2.x to itself. I caught it in a few minutes so >>> made a snap decision and fixed it. I plan on fixing up the hooks >>> tomorrow to prevent it from happening again. >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Davis <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> This is not the commit you are looking for. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> What happened here? Why forced? >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Updated Branches: >>>>>> refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update) >> >> >> >> -- >> Iris Couch -- Iris Couch
