That’s up to you. I’ve been using forks lately because that’s how all Jenkins related repositories are configured (we avoid shared branches due to some Jenkins issue ironically).
Just note that if you force push to a shared branch, please make sure to note that on the dev list so that others know to use `git pull —rebase` On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 03:35, Andrei Ivanov <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry about that, I wasn't sure how to handle adding a trivial import > cleanup change to my PR, that's why I've ammended the last commit. > I wanted to leave the existing commits separate, so squashing wasn't an > option (or maybe I could have squashed just the last 2 commits?) > > Basically I chose option 2 from > > https://www.burntfen.com/2015-10-30/how-to-amend-a-commit-on-a-github-pull-request > 😕 > > Maybe I should still use a fork then to work on instead of the main repo? > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:44 PM Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It's typically not a great idea to use force push in the main > > repositories as they can be shared between people. Whenever I like to > > use force push, I usually only do it on my own forks before making a > > PR. I don't think anyone else is using this branch, but it's typically > > a good idea to avoid force pushing on shared branches (and definitely > > not on the master branch). This is more of a note for future reference > > since there isn't much you can do here. > > > > On Mon, 27 May 2019 at 11:12, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository. > > > > > > shadow pushed a change to branch LOG4J2-2579 > > > in repository > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j-audit.git. > > > > > > > > > discard 8fcfbb5 LOG4J2-2579: add a @EventName to the generated Java > > event interfaces and use it, if available, to generate the event name > > > add 998525c LOG4J2-2579: add a @EventName to the generated Java > > event interfaces and use it, if available, to generate the event name > > > > > > This update added new revisions after undoing existing revisions. > > > That is to say, some revisions that were in the old version of the > > > branch are not in the new version. This situation occurs > > > when a user --force pushes a change and generates a repository > > > containing something like this: > > > > > > * -- * -- B -- O -- O -- O (8fcfbb5) > > > \ > > > N -- N -- N refs/heads/LOG4J2-2579 (998525c) > > > > > > You should already have received notification emails for all of the O > > > revisions, and so the following emails describe only the N revisions > > > from the common base, B. > > > > > > Any revisions marked "omit" are not gone; other references still > > > refer to them. Any revisions marked "discard" are gone forever. > > > > > > No new revisions were added by this update. > > > > > > Summary of changes: > > > .../logging/log4j/audit/LogEventFactory.java | 29 > > ++++++++++++++-------- > > > .../logging/log4j/audit/AuditLoggerTest.java | 7 ++++-- > > > 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
