Chris Rorvick <ch...@rorvick.com> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Chris Rorvick <ch...@rorvick.com> writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
>>> index 4a6f822..012b52f 100644
>>> --- a/remote.c
>>> +++ b/remote.c
>>> @@ -1315,14 +1315,18 @@ void set_ref_status_for_push(struct ref 
>>> *remote_refs, int send_mirror,
>>>                *
>>>                * (1) if the old thing does not exist, it is OK.
>>>                *
>>> -              * (2) if you do not have the old thing, you are not allowed
>>> +              * (2) if the destination is under refs/tags/ you are
>>> +              *     not allowed to overwrite it; tags are expected
>>> +              *     to be static once created
>>> +              *
>>> +              * (3) if you do not have the old thing, you are not allowed
>>>                *     to overwrite it; you would not know what you are losing
>>>                *     otherwise.
>>>                *
>>> -              * (3) if both new and old are commit-ish, and new is a
>>> +              * (4) if both new and old are commit-ish, and new is a
>>>                *     descendant of old, it is OK.
>>>                *
>>> -              * (4) regardless of all of the above, removing :B is
>>> +              * (5) regardless of all of the above, removing :B is
>>>                *     always allowed.
>>>                */
>>
>> We may want to reword (0) to make it clear that --force
>> (and +A:B) can be used to defeat all the other rules.
>
> On that note, having (5) be "regardless of all of the above ..." seems
> a little awkward.  That would seem to fit better towards the top.

Sure.  (0) you can always force; (1) you can always delete; and then
other requirements.  That may indeed read better.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to