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.
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