Unfortunately, I have rebased one of my branches under code review with this and submitted a new batch to the review.
How should this be handled? On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:15 AM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote: > After careful consideration, and some experimentation, this is the > best plan as I see it: > > The last commit we have in ASF master right now > (c66d23a5ac65ec5218ee47134aea423fd62a32cc) is not one that we wish to > keep. It's basically the correct commit content-wise, but the message > and hence hash are wrong and needlessly conflict with Gerrit's proper > version (900bf1345410264e9b48469da93ccbd831920d2e). Resolving the > issue by rewinding or restoring Gerrit from backup would involve both > rewriting history on Gerrit's master branch by rewinding it and > cherry-picking commits onto it, and ugly surgery to Gerrit's internal > database. Therefore a force push to ASF git to overwrite the incorrect > commit, with the correct commit that currently resides in Gerrit's > master, is likely the least painful option. > > The only complicating fact of course, is if anyone has pulled c66d23a5 > to their master branch, or merged it into any feature branches. For > the former case, just performing a git reset --HARD to master once the > force-update is performed should suffice. For the latter case, some > less simple git-fu will probably be in order (checking out to last > common ancestor, then re-merging would likely be simplest). > > I'm open to thoughts/suggestions/objections. Rewriting history in git > is not something to be taken lightly, so I want to be sure everyone's > in agreement and aware of what's going to happen. > > - Ian > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Jochen, > > > > We use Gerrit as a code review platform. It works pretty well I would > > say. The way we had it set up at one point pre-incubation (which was > > preferable, and AFAIK impossible in ASF) was that nobody could > > directly commit to the "reference" repository. It had to go through > > Gerrit, and be reviewed and verified, and then submitted. The reason > > for this mixup is that now folks have to take the commits from Gerrit, > > and submit them to the ASF repo outside of Gerrit, instead of it being > > a commit hook. As with anything git, this part is kind of like working > > with a loaded gun. We have a script that makes this easier and less > > error-prone, but there's a corner case apparently where where one can > > submit things that aren't actually verified in Gerrit (or the script > > wasn't used, not sure which). > > > > - Ian > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Jochen Wiedmann > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, Ian, > >> > >> the information that I read from your mail is that there are currently > >> two Git repositories in use: One being the "official apache > >> repository", the other being the repository with the "Gerrit master > >> branch". > >> > >> Is that impression correct? If so, what are the reasons? And what can > >> we do to fix that? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Jochen > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:01 PM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Hey all, > >>> If you haven't pulled from > >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-asterixdb.git > >>> (i.e. asterixdb's official apache repository) lately, please don't > >>> until you get an email giving the all-clear. Same goes for submitting > >>> and merging patches from Gerrit. Something inadvertently got committed > >>> to the head of the ASF master branch, which does not exactly agree > >>> with the head of Gerrit's master branch, so they are diverged at the > >>> moment. > >>> > >>> Additionally, if in your AsterixDB repository, 'git rev-parse > >>> asf/master' returns c66d23a5ac65ec5218ee47134aea423fd62a32cc , please > >>> reply to this so we know who might be affected. This means you have > >>> the latest from the ASF repository- which we may have to force-push > >>> and overwrite the latest commit from. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> -Ian > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Any world that can produce the Taj Mahal, William Shakespeare, > >> and Stripe toothpaste can't be all bad. (C.R. MacNamara, One Two Three) > -- Amoudi, Abdullah.
