On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 07:13:38PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2025 at 12:13:48AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 10:24:36PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > >... > > > (If this was not a team-maintained package, I would force-push > > > as needed to match the archive). > > > > Commits removed by force-push stay in all forks and clones, this can > > create a mess with more than one committer or merge requests enabled. > > By "not a team-maintained package" I was actually thinking about my > own repositories, where there is only one commiter, and I have not > merge requests enabled. > > For the general case, yes, one should be careful not to disrupt > the work by others. > > > Michael: The current repository has a commit saying "Acknowledge NMU" > to refer to 2.7.2-1.1, but none of the current commits matches exactly > version 2.7.2-1.1. > > I think that's not ok and should be fixed,
This kind of merging is a more git way of doing things than working with a linear history, but few Debian maintainers are using salsa that way and my impression is that manual merging as Michael did is actually more common. > so I'm going to add a > single commit to match 2.7.2-1.1, then I will add the proper tag, then > I'll add the NMU from Adrian which has just arrived to unstable, also > with tags. Then we will be in sync with the archive. >... And then you git merge the previous state of the repository? Breaking history would disrupt the work of others in a team repository. cu Adrian
