Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Balaco Baco]

> > See 
> > http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git/commit/?id=206676601eb853fc3
> 19df14cd3398fbdfde665ac
> >
> >
> > 
> > 
> > I was not even aware that this is possible. Is there anything on 
> > server side that can prevent it?
> > 
> > Would be good if commit were amended and force pushed to fix it.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Is this even a problem? I'm pretty sure Git warns you if you try to
> commit something before user.name and user.email are defined, and if
> someone wants to do so, I don't see why you should try to stop them.
> It wouldn't work, anyway; they would just write some simple name like
> "anonymous" and some nonsense email if they really want to be anonymous.
> 

This commit just removed a line from the README:

"Please look at the GRUB Wiki <http://grub.enbug.org> for
testing-procedures."

Is this change something that may justify that it's-not-me-there action?
I agree that it should not be prevented to avoid some pressure
situations that might be (eventually) present. Bogus random data there
would be harder to track. The empty fields are easy, and if it
guarantees some safety to whoever does it, should be the choice.


-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - mmm... Fastmail...

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Kaz Kylheku]

On 30.10.2015 13:59, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> I don't have non-fast-forward rights. Does someone from savannah-users
>> have them? Could he just delete this commit?
> 
> If you do that, then anyone that already did a pull after it went in
> will have a broken tree.  Rather annoying.

Nope. They will have a git in which that commit looks like their own
local work. *Someone* will inadvertently do a "git push" to blast out
their changes based on that deleted commit, thereby causing it to
reappear.

:)

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Andreas Schwab]

Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> writes:

> Nope. They will have a git in which that commit looks like their own
> local work. *Someone* will inadvertently do a "git push" to blast out
> their changes based on that deleted commit, thereby causing it to
> reappear.

Not if another one pushes something different in the mean time.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[André Z. D. A.]

> 30.10.2015 23:59, Lennart Sorensen пишет:
> 
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:19:19PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>
>>> On 30.10.2015 21:09, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30.10.2015 21:06, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30.10.2015 15:26, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> See
>>>>>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git/commit/?id=206676601eb853fc319df14cd3398fbdfde665ac
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was not even aware that this is possible. Is there anything on server
>>>>>> side that can prevent it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would be good if commit were amended and force pushed to fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a bug in SGit. I'll investigate how it happened
>>>
>>> I don't have non-fast-forward rights. Does someone from savannah-users
>>> have them? Could he just delete this commit?
>>
>> If you do that, then anyone that already did a pull after it went in
>> will have a broken tree. Rather annoying.
> 
> If we decide to fix this commit it is better done now, while it is the
> last one. It is annoying but do you have suggestion how it can be done
> differently?

+1 to undo it now

Indeed. The faster it is fixed smaller the number of potential unintentional repeats for it, if any.

Re: Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[André Z. D. A.]

> 30.10.2015 23:59, Lennart Sorensen пишет:
> 
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:19:19PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>
>>> On 30.10.2015 21:09, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30.10.2015 21:06, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30.10.2015 15:26, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> See
>>>>>> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git/commit/?id=206676601eb853fc319df14cd3398fbdfde665ac
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was not even aware that this is possible. Is there anything on server
>>>>>> side that can prevent it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would be good if commit were amended and force pushed to fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a bug in SGit. I'll investigate how it happened
>>>
>>> I don't have non-fast-forward rights. Does someone from savannah-users
>>> have them? Could he just delete this commit?
>>
>> If you do that, then anyone that already did a pull after it went in
>> will have a broken tree. Rather annoying.
> 
> If we decide to fix this commit it is better done now, while it is the
> last one. It is annoying but do you have suggestion how it can be done
> differently?

+1 to undo it now

Indeed. The faster it is fixed smaller the number of potential unintentional repeats for it, if any.

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Andrei Borzenkov]

31.10.2015 10:02, Andreas Schwab пишет:
> Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> writes:
>
>> Nope. They will have a git in which that commit looks like their own
>> local work. *Someone* will inadvertently do a "git push" to blast out
>> their changes based on that deleted commit, thereby causing it to
>> reappear.
>
> Not if another one pushes something different in the mean time.
>

Which is why I said "amended".

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Kaz Kylheku]

On 02.11.2015 07:11, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 08:24:06AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>> If we decide to fix this commit it is better done now, while it is the 
>> last
>> one. It is annoying but do you have suggestion how it can be done
>> differently?
> 
> Well the only options are:
> 
> 1) Leave it alone
> 2) Break the tree of anyone that already pulled.  (Posting instructions 
> on
> how to fix it would at least be nice then).
> 
> Not sure how many people regularly pull the tree.

This is silly FUD. There is no ever any "broken tree".

Firstly, people who have no local changes do not experience any ill 
effect.
They just have to do

   $ git fetch

   # oops, upstream and local branch have diverged
   # but I have absolutely no local work to preserve;
   # just "warp" HEAD to the new one:

   $ git reset --hard origin/master

   # done!

Those who have outstanding local work never have any expectation of 
non-breakage!
*All* fetches are "non-fast-forward" with regard to unpublished
local work, because they occur to a prior version of the work, 
underneath your
changes.

In *all* cases you can do this:

   # Fast-forward or not, I don't care!
   $ git fetch

   # Take my 13 unpublished commits (or whatever number), rebase them 
over the
   # latest upstream master, and make the result my local master branch:

   $ git rebase HEAD~13 --onto origin/master

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Kaz Kylheku]

On 02.11.2015 07:11, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 08:24:06AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>> If we decide to fix this commit it is better done now, while it is the 
>> last
>> one. It is annoying but do you have suggestion how it can be done
>> differently?
> 
> Well the only options are:
> 
> 1) Leave it alone
> 2) Break the tree of anyone that already pulled.  (Posting instructions 
> on
> how to fix it would at least be nice then).
> 
> Not sure how many people regularly pull the tree.

This is silly FUD. There is no ever any "broken tree".

Firstly, people who have no local changes do not experience any ill 
effect.
They just have to do

   $ git fetch

   # oops, upstream and local branch have diverged
   # but I have absolutely no local work to preserve;
   # just "warp" HEAD to the new one:

   $ git reset --hard origin/master

   # done!

Those who have outstanding local work never have any expectation of 
non-breakage!
*All* fetches are "non-fast-forward" with regard to unpublished
local work, because they occur to a prior version of the work, 
underneath your
changes.

In *all* cases you can do this:

   # Fast-forward or not, I don't care!
   $ git fetch

   # Take my 13 unpublished commits (or whatever number), rebase them 
over the
   # latest upstream master, and make the result my local master branch:

   $ git rebase HEAD~13 --onto origin/master

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Andrei Borzenkov]

31.10.2015 16:46, Andrei Borzenkov пишет:
> 31.10.2015 10:02, Andreas Schwab пишет:
>> Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> writes:
>>
>>> Nope. They will have a git in which that commit looks like their own
>>> local work. *Someone* will inadvertently do a "git push" to blast out
>>> their changes based on that deleted commit, thereby causing it to
>>> reappear.
>>
>> Not if another one pushes something different in the mean time.
>>
>
> Which is why I said "amended".

Actually I was probably wrong. "git pull" will see non-ff case and will 
attempt merge of remote and local, unless merge.ff=only is set.

So we can only hope that everyone who has commit rights reads this list 
and will check local clone and do rebase to wipe out this commit if 
necessary. Otherwise it will be resurrected indeed.

May be it's not worse the trouble then to remove it.

Re: [Savannah-users] Anonymous commit (empty Author and Committer)

[Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1381 bytes --]

Commit is removed upstream. Please do git reset --hard origin/master in
your tree. When on master branch if you have no work on master branch and
git rebase -I origin/master and remove commit manually otherwise
Le 3 nov. 2015 4:59 AM, "Andrei Borzenkov" <arvidjaar@gmail.com> a écrit :

> 31.10.2015 16:46, Andrei Borzenkov пишет:
>
>> 31.10.2015 10:02, Andreas Schwab пишет:
>>
>>> Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> writes:
>>>
>>> Nope. They will have a git in which that commit looks like their own
>>>> local work. *Someone* will inadvertently do a "git push" to blast out
>>>> their changes based on that deleted commit, thereby causing it to
>>>> reappear.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not if another one pushes something different in the mean time.
>>>
>>>
>> Which is why I said "amended".
>>
>
> Actually I was probably wrong. "git pull" will see non-ff case and will
> attempt merge of remote and local, unless merge.ff=only is set.
>
> So we can only hope that everyone who has commit rights reads this list
> and will check local clone and do rebase to wipe out this commit if
> necessary. Otherwise it will be resurrected indeed.
>
> May be it's not worse the trouble then to remove it.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2227 bytes --]