Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Dan Smith]

Master and develop should be protected. Infra ticket is here -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13654.

It sounds like protecting the release branches from push --force but not
push --delete is a bit more complicated.

-Dan

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Ernest Burghardt 
wrote:

> +1 for blocking shared branches
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Dan Smith  wrote:
>
> > It looks like there is a lot of support for preventing force pushes on
> > these branches. I discussed this with Jake offline, he's also ok with
> > having them blocked. I'll file a ticket with infra.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Nitin Lamba  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for no force push on shared branches.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Mark Bretl 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 For no force push
> > > >
> > > > --Mark
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Kevin Duling 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1. Don't turn to the dark side of the --force.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mar 8, 2017 3:12 PM, "Dan Smith"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, shared branches was kinda of a vague term. I am talking
> about
> > > > > > develop, master, and release*.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think in general if you are working on a feature branch with
> > along
> > > > > other
> > > > > > people, you also shouldn't force push that feature branch, but
> for
> > > the
> > > > > > moment the proposal is just to protect develop, master, and
> > release*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with should also block push --delete for develop and
> > master.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Dan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Jared Stewart <
> jstew...@pivotal.io
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 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 
> > > > 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 
> > > 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)
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Dan Smith]

It looks like there is a lot of support for preventing force pushes on
these branches. I discussed this with Jake offline, he's also ok with
having them blocked. I'll file a ticket with infra.

-Dan

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Nitin Lamba  wrote:

> +1 for no force push on shared branches.
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:
>
> > +1 For no force push
> >
> > --Mark
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Kevin Duling  wrote:
> >
> > > +1. Don't turn to the dark side of the --force.
> > >
> > > On Mar 8, 2017 3:12 PM, "Dan Smith"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yeah, shared branches was kinda of a vague term. I am talking about
> > > > develop, master, and release*.
> > > >
> > > > I think in general if you are working on a feature branch with along
> > > other
> > > > people, you also shouldn't force push that feature branch, but for
> the
> > > > moment the proposal is just to protect develop, master, and release*
> > > >
> > > > I agree with should also block push --delete for develop and master.
> > > >
> > > > -Dan
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Jared Stewart 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 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 
> > 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 
> 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)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Nitin Lamba]

+1 for no force push on shared branches.

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:

> +1 For no force push
>
> --Mark
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Kevin Duling  wrote:
>
> > +1. Don't turn to the dark side of the --force.
> >
> > On Mar 8, 2017 3:12 PM, "Dan Smith"  wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, shared branches was kinda of a vague term. I am talking about
> > > develop, master, and release*.
> > >
> > > I think in general if you are working on a feature branch with along
> > other
> > > people, you also shouldn't force push that feature branch, but for the
> > > moment the proposal is just to protect develop, master, and release*
> > >
> > > I agree with should also block push --delete for develop and master.
> > >
> > > -Dan
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Jared Stewart 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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 
> 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  >
> > > > 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  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)
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Mark Bretl]

+1 For no force push

--Mark

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Kevin Duling  wrote:

> +1. Don't turn to the dark side of the --force.
>
> On Mar 8, 2017 3:12 PM, "Dan Smith"  wrote:
>
> > Yeah, shared branches was kinda of a vague term. I am talking about
> > develop, master, and release*.
> >
> > I think in general if you are working on a feature branch with along
> other
> > people, you also shouldn't force push that feature branch, but for the
> > moment the proposal is just to protect develop, master, and release*
> >
> > I agree with should also block push --delete for develop and master.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Jared Stewart 
> wrote:
> >
> > > 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  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 
> > > 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  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)
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Kevin Duling]

+1. Don't turn to the dark side of the --force.

On Mar 8, 2017 3:12 PM, "Dan Smith"  wrote:

> Yeah, shared branches was kinda of a vague term. I am talking about
> develop, master, and release*.
>
> I think in general if you are working on a feature branch with along other
> people, you also shouldn't force push that feature branch, but for the
> moment the proposal is just to protect develop, master, and release*
>
> I agree with should also block push --delete for develop and master.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Jared Stewart  wrote:
>
> > 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  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 
> > 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  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)
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Dan Smith]

Yeah, shared branches was kinda of a vague term. I am talking about
develop, master, and release*.

I think in general if you are working on a feature branch with along other
people, you also shouldn't force push that feature branch, but for the
moment the proposal is just to protect develop, master, and release*

I agree with should also block push --delete for develop and master.

-Dan

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Jared Stewart  wrote:

> 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  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 
> 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  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)
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Anthony Baker]

I believe it is (but would be good to verify).

Anthony

> On Mar 8, 2017, at 1:55 PM, Jared Stewart  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  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)
> 

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Jared Stewart]

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  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  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  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)
>> 
>> 

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Dave Barnes]

> 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  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  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)
>
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Jared Stewart]

+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  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)

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Dan Smith]

You should never force push a shared branch, period.

It's just luck that no one has pushed the changes you intended to remove
*back* to develop. If someone has a copy of develop checked out and does a
pull, git will merge your new copy of develop with their old copy of
develop, and they'll push all that stuff right back. git revert is the only
way to go.

>I did not see a pull for Karen's changes or I would have reached out to
have them corrected.

We are an open source project. Lots of people may have a copy of develop,
and you won't know about it. It's not reasonable to break develop and
expect to be able to personally contact everyone who has a copy of it and
ask them to reset.

-Dan

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Jacob Barrett  wrote:

> The force push was done to clean up a bunch of commits that broke develop
> on the longer list of targeted platforms and moved them to another branch.
>
> It could have been done with a series of reverts. Sorry for the confusion.
> Other pulls pending on Geode native were corrected. I did not see a pull
> for Karen's changes or I would have reached out to have them corrected.
>
> I disagree on the blocking of force commits. Especially at his early stage
> of source cleanup.
>
> -Jake
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:48 PM Dan Smith  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)
> >
>

Re: A force push happened to geode-native develop!?!

[Jacob Barrett]

The force push was done to clean up a bunch of commits that broke develop
on the longer list of targeted platforms and moved them to another branch.

It could have been done with a series of reverts. Sorry for the confusion.
Other pulls pending on Geode native were corrected. I did not see a pull
for Karen's changes or I would have reached out to have them corrected.

I disagree on the blocking of force commits. Especially at his early stage
of source cleanup.

-Jake

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 1:48 PM Dan Smith  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)
>