and...@dunslane.net (Andrew Dunstan) writes:
> On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
>> repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
>> event. Now, our committers all seem to be pretty careful peopl
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:52, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> >> Or for that we could just disable branch creation *completely*, and
>> >> then turn off that restriction that one time / year that we actually
>> >> create a br
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> The master branch can be removed the same as any other one - just
>> substitute master in place of REL9_0_STABLE in the above commands.
>> But why would you do such a nutty thing? Worst case scenario looks to
>> me lik
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> So if someone does this (which does not look at all likely to me):
>>
>> git push origin :REL9_0_STABLE
>> git branch -r -D origin/REL9_0_STABLE
>> git branch -d REL9_0_STABLE
>>
>> ...then, yes, they will need to f
Robert Haas wrote:
> So if someone does this (which does not look at all likely to me):
>
> git push origin :REL9_0_STABLE
> git branch -r -D origin/REL9_0_STABLE
> git branch -d REL9_0_STABLE
>
> ...then, yes, they will need to find someone who has run 'git
> pull' since the last change that
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 18:19, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> >> Or for that we could just disable branch creation *completely*, and
>>> >> then turn off that restric
Robert Haas wrote:
> The master branch can be removed the same as any other one - just
> substitute master in place of REL9_0_STABLE in the above commands.
> But why would you do such a nutty thing? Worst case scenario looks to
> me like you type the first of those commands and then go "oh crud".
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> >> Or for that we could just disable branch creation *completely*, and
>> >> then turn off that restriction that one time / year that we actually
>> >> create a
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
> > On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
> >> repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
> >> event.
>
> > Pushing a local topic branch by mistake seem
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> OK, someone removes a branch.
As was explained earlier on this thread, it's not gone at that
point; it's a dangling reference. I think that unless someone
explicitly "prunes" the dangling references, they are left around
for a week, and can easily be checked out again.
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
>> repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
>> event.
> Pushing a local topic branch by mistake seems much more likely to me.
Ye
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Or for that we could just disable branch creation *completely*, and
> >> then turn off that restriction that one time / year that we actually
> >> create a branch?
> >
> > Well, branch creation can always be undone --
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Or for that we could just disable branch creation *completely*, and
>> then turn off that restriction that one time / year that we actually
>> create a branch?
>
> Well, branch creation can always be undone --- branch removal seems like
> t
On 27.01.2011 18:41, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Well, branch creation can always be undone --- branch removal seems like
the big problem because it can't.
Actually, all you need to do is to push the branch back to resurrect it.
As long as your local branch is up-to-date with what was removed (or you
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:36, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>
> >> Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
> >> repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
> >> event. ?
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:36, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
>> repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
>> event. Now, our committers all seem to be pret
On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
event. Now, our committers all seem to be pretty careful people, so
I don't feel strongly about having extra secur
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 17:37, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I thought we had some hooks on gitmaster to help prevent accidents like
>> inadvertent branch deletion.
> We have hooks to prevent a number of things, but not the removal of
> branches (or tags). We'll send an emai
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 17:37, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01/26/2011 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>
>>> For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
>>> to remove git branches. For example, I can ea
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 17:37, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 01/26/2011 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>> For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
>> to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
>> my github repository using:
>>
>>
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> >> > For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly e
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> > For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
> >> > to remove git branches. ?For example, I can easily
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
>> > to remove git branches. ?For example, I can easily remove a branch on
>> > my gi
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
> > to remove git branches. ?For example, I can easily remove a branch on
> > my github repository using:
> >
> > ? ? ? ?$ git branch -d :branch_
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 01/26/2011 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
> > to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
> > my github repository using:
> >
> > $ git branch -d :branch_name
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
> to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
> my github repository using:
>
> $ git branch -d :branch_name
>
> I don't believe that i
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26:04AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
> > to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
> > my github reposit
On 01/26/2011 11:26 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
my github repository using:
$ git branch -d :branch_name
I don't believe that is revertable. Wha
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:26:04AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
> to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
> my github repository using:
>
> $ git branch -d :branch_name
>
> I don't believ
For those of you using git, I wanted to point out that it is fairly easy
to remove git branches. For example, I can easily remove a branch on
my github repository using:
$ git branch -d :branch_name
I don't believe that is revertable. What is scarey is that this could
be done on our 'or
30 matches
Mail list logo
