Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-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 0EF5D99B9 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 00:32:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7613 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2012 00:32:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 7513 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2012 00:32:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 7504 invoked by uid 99); 6 Feb 2012 00:32:51 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:32:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.212.52] (HELO mail-vw0-f52.google.com) (209.85.212.52) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:32:46 +0000 Received: by vbih1 with SMTP id h1so4784780vbi.11 for ; Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:32:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.52.26.97 with SMTP id k1mr7036383vdg.35.1328488345100; Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:32:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.117.205 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Feb 2012 16:32:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20120203220453.D4E6631B93A@tyr.zones.apache.org> From: Jason Smith Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 07:32:05 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Git Push Summary To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Funny, I was thinking of an informal custom but I very much appreciate your investigation about codifying it. On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Paul Davis wr= ote: > Possible but I'm not sure how easily/sanely I could codify that grace > period into a Git hook. Our release branches are supposed to be > unmodifiable (as well as not allow merges) but the configuration > hasn't been updated in regards to our release procedure decisions. > I'll get to that later today hopefully. > > On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Jason Smith wrote: >> The Git history is source code too. Reading and comprehending is key. >> We spend as much or more time reading Git logs as building new ones. >> >> FWIW (not much) I would prefer a few minutes grace period where people >> can push --force, rather than a tangled git history conveying no >> information except that somebody made an error. >> >> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Paul Davis wrote: >>> Noah managed to merge 1.2.x to itself. I caught it in a few minutes so >>> made a snap decision and fixed it. I plan on fixing up the hooks >>> tomorrow to prevent it from happening again. >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Paul Davis wrote: >>>> This is not the commit you are looking for. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Randall Leeds wrote: >>>>> What happened here? Why forced? >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, =C2=A0 wrote: >>>>>> Updated Branches: >>>>>> =C2=A0refs/heads/1.2.x 05a6aea97 -> 506deab47 (forced update) >> >> >> >> -- >> Iris Couch --=20 Iris Couch