Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C699A1832A for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 63454 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2015 22:45:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-dev-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 63374 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2015 22:45:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list common-dev@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 63362 invoked by uid 99); 10 Nov 2015 22:45:43 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:45:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id BD3AB1A0C79 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:45:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.999 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=1.999, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-eu-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id auWN8thRPhPD for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relayvx11b.securemail.intermedia.net (relayvx11b.securemail.intermedia.net [64.78.52.184]) by mx1-eu-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-eu-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 23B7D20BD8 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from securemail.intermedia.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emg-ca-1-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACF9853F22 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:45:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Need for force-push on feature branches MIME-Version: 1.0 x-echoworx-msg-id: 222e8ef8-b01c-45c1-bc2a-018c1efab5fd x-echoworx-emg-received: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:45:31.636 -0800 x-echoworx-action: delivered Received: from 10.254.155.14 ([10.254.155.14]) by emg-ca-1-1 (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.2) with SMTP ID 368 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:45:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (unknown [10.224.117.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by emg-ca-1-1.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 737B253F4A for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:45:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (10.224.117.102) by MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net (10.224.117.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:45:30 -0800 Received: from MBX080-W4-CO-2.exch080.serverpod.net ([10.224.117.102]) by mbx080-w4-co-2.exch080.serverpod.net ([10.224.117.102]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:45:30 -0800 From: Steve Loughran To: "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" Thread-Topic: Need for force-push on feature branches Thread-Index: AQHRHAQy5U71H+b3aUyIIRjxrME/bJ6WYR6A Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:45:30 +0000 Message-ID: <24B40D0D-1ADF-4AD7-910D-586D4F571BED@hortonworks.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [86.178.206.108] x-source-routing-agent: Processed Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <63BAE4A48475DB4F9FE0B11ECF9EA1C9@exch080.serverpod.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On 10 Nov 2015, at 22:07, Karthik Kambatla wrote: >=20 > Hi folks, >=20 > Recently, Infra disabled force-pushes (and non-fast-forward pushes) to al= l > branches to avoid accidental overwrites or deletions. >=20 > I propose we reach out to Infra and ask for an exemption since our workfl= ow > for feature branches involves deletions and force-pushes. >=20 I asked them for this exemption for all branches called feature/* earlier t= oday; its consistent with the git flow branch naming.=20 if all feature branches go in under there, people working on them are free = to rebase as they choose. > We should likely wait for a day or so to hear any concerns against this > request. Also, can someone volunteer following up on this? I am going awa= y > on vacation shortly, and will have limited access to internet/email. >=20