Christian Couder writes:
> There is already a --force option, but I can add a --force-type in a
> another patch.
Oh, that was not what I meant. As long as existing --force override
this check, that should be sufficient and more preferrable than yet
another kind of "force".
Thanks.
--
To unsubs
From: Junio C Hamano
>
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>> But if all the objects that point to an object, called O, are to be
>> replaced, then in most cases object O probably doesn't need to be
>> replaced. It's probably sufficient to create the new object, called
>> O2, that would replace object
Christian Couder writes:
> But if all the objects that point to an object, called O, are to be
> replaced, then in most cases object O probably doesn't need to be
> replaced. It's probably sufficient to create the new object, called
> O2, that would replace object O and to replace all the objects
From: Junio C Hamano
>
> Thomas Rast writes:
>
>> Hrm, you're right, that's a flaw in my logic. You could do the same in
>> all other cases too, e.g. replace a tree so that an entry is of a
>> different type and at the same time change the type of the object
>> itself. You however have to care
Thomas Rast writes:
> Hrm, you're right, that's a flaw in my logic. You could do the same in
> all other cases too, e.g. replace a tree so that an entry is of a
> different type and at the same time change the type of the object
> itself. You however have to carefully go through all objects tha
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Christian Couder writes:
>
>> Users replacing an object with one of a different type were not
>> prevented to do so, even if it was obvious, and stated in the doc,
>> that bad things would result from doing that.
>>
>> To avoid mistakes, it is better to just forbid that
Christian Couder writes:
> Users replacing an object with one of a different type were not
> prevented to do so, even if it was obvious, and stated in the doc,
> that bad things would result from doing that.
>
> To avoid mistakes, it is better to just forbid that though.
>
> There is no case wher
7 matches
Mail list logo
