On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> 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 like you type the first of those commands and then go "oh crud". >> And if any of our 19 committers were unaware of the hazards of >> inserting random colons into their git commands, hopefully this > ----------------------------------------------- >> discussion has awakened them to the error of their ways. > > Yes, that was really my goal --- to point out that some git operations > are not reverable.
That's true, but hopefully at this point it's clear that actually getting rid of a branch permanently would require rather a LOT of work, and that even if someone deliberately did their absolute best to get rid of a branch, an experienced git user could put it back in less than 15 minutes. I actually think a more likely scenario would be: we deliberately remove a branch - and then someone accidentally re-pushes it. But since we have no plans to actually do any such thing, that risk also seems more theoretical than actual. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
