commit cf49e43f86de16f1cc84ab44f6d4fa3c7e18902f Merge: cd1f718 0adef98 Author: Kurt Zeilenga kurt@OpenLDAP.org Date: Mon Mar 28 18:42:22 2011 -0700
Merge branch 'master' of ssh://git-master.openldap.org/~git/git/openldap
We'll need better messages for merges, this doesn't say much.
On Mar 29, 2011, at 6:38 AM, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
commit cf49e43f86de16f1cc84ab44f6d4fa3c7e18902f Merge: cd1f718 0adef98 Author: Kurt Zeilenga kurt@OpenLDAP.org Date: Mon Mar 28 18:42:22 2011 -0700
Merge branch 'master' of ssh://git-master.openldap.org/~git/git/openldap
We'll need better messages for merges, this doesn't say much.
I'm not sure why his merge was needed. Likely I goofed. I think it was a no-op.
-- Kurt
Kurt Zeilenga writes:
I'm not sure why his merge was needed. Likely I goofed. I think it was a no-op.
Ah. Well, we'll have more glitches I'm sure.
'gitk --all' or 'git log --graph' shows you did 'Update guide Copyright/License handling' in one branch and 'Update configure' + Update for git' in another. I.e. didn't pull the first before committing/pushing the second.
On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
Kurt Zeilenga writes:
I'm not sure why his merge was needed. Likely I goofed. I think it was a no-op.
Ah. Well, we'll have more glitches I'm sure.
'gitk --all' or 'git log --graph' shows you did 'Update guide Copyright/License handling' in one branch and 'Update configure' + Update for git' in another. I.e. didn't pull the first before committing/pushing the second.
Shouldn't that have been rejected by the hooks:
[receive] denyNonFastForwards = true denyDeletes = true
If something requires a merge, wouldn't that be a non-fast-forward push?
On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
Kurt Zeilenga writes:
I'm not sure why his merge was needed. Likely I goofed. I think it was a no-op.
Ah. Well, we'll have more glitches I'm sure.
'gitk --all' or 'git log --graph' shows you did 'Update guide Copyright/License handling' in one branch and 'Update configure' + Update for git' in another. I.e. didn't pull the first before committing/pushing the second.
Shouldn't that have been rejected by the hooks:
[receive] denyNonFastForwards = true denyDeletes = true
If something requires a merge, wouldn't that be a non-fast-forward push?
Actually, instead of per repo settings, these might need to be system settings.
Let me install those.
-- Kurt
On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:57 AM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
Kurt Zeilenga writes:
I'm not sure why his merge was needed. Likely I goofed. I think it was a no-op.
Ah. Well, we'll have more glitches I'm sure.
'gitk --all' or 'git log --graph' shows you did 'Update guide Copyright/License handling' in one branch and 'Update configure' + Update for git' in another. I.e. didn't pull the first before committing/pushing the second.
Shouldn't that have been rejected by the hooks:
[receive] denyNonFastForwards = true denyDeletes = true
If something requires a merge, wouldn't that be a non-fast-forward push?
Actually, instead of per repo settings, these might need to be system settings.
nevermind. They ought to be per repo otherwise we won't be able to delete from personal clones.
-- Kurt
Let me install those.
-- Kurt
-
Hallvard B Furuseth -
Kurt Zeilenga -
Kurt Zeilenga