When I say “shared branches”, I’m thinking of develop, master, and release-* as mentioned by Dan.
> On Mar 8, 2017, at 3:03 PM, Dave Barnes <dbar...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> It also would seem prudent to block 'git push —delete’ on shared branches > > Isn't that how we clean up feature branches? > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> +1 to blocking force pushes on shared branches. It also would seem >> prudent to block 'git push —delete’ on shared branches if that isn’t >> already blocked. >> >>> On Mar 8, 2017, at 1:48 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: >>> >>> Karen and I just spent a long time tracking down weird git history in her >>> checkout to discover that someone did a force push of the geode-native >>> develop. That's not cool, because it screws over anyone with a copy of >> the >>> branch and we potentially lost history. >>> >>> I think we need to do two things. >>> >>> 1) Block force pushes on any shared branches (develop, master, >> release-*). >>> If we are in agreement, I'll file a JIRA with INFRA >>> >>> 2) Figure out what to with geode-native develop. It looks like there have >>> been commits since the force push. Do we keep what is on the branch now, >> or >>> try to put it back to what it was? >>> >>> -Dan >>> >>> >>> From: jbarr...@apache.org >>> >>> 4:57 PM (20 hours ago) >>> >>> to commits >>> Repository: geode-native >>> Updated Branches: >>> refs/heads/develop aff706be2 -> 06e8f39a0 (forced update) >> >>
