From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: theirs/ours was Re: [PATCH 6/6] Add a new test for using a custom merge strategy Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:31:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20080729043117.GB26997@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20080728185604.GA26322@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20080728192651.GA26677@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Git Mailinglist , Miklos Vajna To: sverre@rabbelier.nl X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 29 06:32:22 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KNgsm-00036g-JT for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 06:32:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751413AbYG2EbU (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:31:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751337AbYG2EbU (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:31:20 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:1384 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751238AbYG2EbT (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:31:19 -0400 Received: (qmail 5646 invoked by uid 111); 29 Jul 2008 04:31:18 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:31:18 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:31:17 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 02:09:18AM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > > If the result should become the state of 'x', too, I would then just > > 'git push origin y:x'. > > But this means that everybody doing a 'git pull' on that repo will get > complaints when pulling, right? Should they just send out a message to > all their users that they'll need to rebase all their changes now? > (Not being sarcastic, am trying to work out what the recommended > workflow is here.) I think you are missing the fact that he is doing this push _after_ having merged the history into master via "-s ours". So it is a fast-forward to push at that point. -Peff