git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org, git@matthieu-moy.fr, christiwald@gmail.com,
	john@keeping.me.uk, philipoakley@iee.email, gitster@pobox.com,
	phillip.wood123@gmail.com, phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk
Cc: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 0/2] advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation
Date: Thu,  6 Jul 2023 23:42:46 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230707054257.3366355-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230706040111.81110-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com>

Many times now, I have seen novices do the following:

1. Start work on their own personal topic branch
2. Push the branch to origin
3. Rebase the branch onto origin/master
4. Try to push again, but Git says they need to pull
5. Pull and make a mess trying to reconcile the older topic branch with
   the rebased topic branch

Help avoid this mistake by giving advice that mentions force-pushing,
rather than assuming that the user always wants to do reconciliation.

Changes from v3:
- Update the tests
- Don't explicitly credit Junio

Alex Henrie (2):
  remote: advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation
  push: advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation

 builtin/push.c    |  27 +++++++-----
 remote.c          |   5 ++-
 t/t7508-status.sh | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 3 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)

Range-diff against v3:
1:  9cbf5f138e < -:  ---------- remote: advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation
-:  ---------- > 1:  9626721c13 remote: advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation
2:  727e1f7636 = 2:  209e86588a push: advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation
-- 
2.41.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-07-07  5:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-02 20:08 [PATCH 0/2] advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation Alex Henrie
2023-07-02 20:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] remote: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-02 20:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] push: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-03 15:33 ` [PATCH 0/2] " Phillip Wood
2023-07-03 16:26   ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-04 21:44   ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-04 22:24     ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-05  5:30       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-06  2:32         ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-04 19:47 ` [PATCH v2 " Alex Henrie
2023-07-04 19:47   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] remote: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-04 21:51     ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-04 22:41       ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-04 19:47   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] push: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-06  4:01   ` [PATCH v3 0/2] " Alex Henrie
2023-07-06  4:01     ` [PATCH v3 1/2] remote: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-06 20:25       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-06 20:40         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-06 23:23           ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-07 17:35             ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-07 17:52             ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-08 18:55               ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-09  1:38                 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-10  4:44                   ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-11  0:55                     ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-12  4:47                       ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-12 15:18                         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-13  4:09                           ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-07  8:48       ` Phillip Wood
2023-07-06  4:01     ` [PATCH v3 2/2] push: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-07  8:49       ` Phillip Wood
2023-07-07 18:44         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-08 18:56         ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-11 18:33           ` Phillip Wood
2023-07-12  4:47             ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-12  4:55               ` Alex Henrie
2023-07-07  5:42     ` Alex Henrie [this message]
2023-07-07  5:42       ` [PATCH v4 1/2] remote: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-07  5:42       ` [PATCH v4 2/2] push: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-13  4:41       ` [PATCH v5 0/3] don't imply that integration is always required before pushing Alex Henrie
2023-07-13  4:41         ` [PATCH v5 1/3] wt-status: don't show divergence advice when committing Alex Henrie
2023-07-13  4:41         ` [PATCH v5 2/3] remote: don't imply that integration is always required before pushing Alex Henrie
2023-07-13  4:41         ` [PATCH v5 3/3] push: " Alex Henrie
2023-07-13  9:51         ` [PATCH v5 0/3] " Phillip Wood
2023-07-13 16:15           ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230707054257.3366355-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com \
    --to=alexhenrie24@gmail.com \
    --cc=christiwald@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@matthieu-moy.fr \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=john@keeping.me.uk \
    --cc=philipoakley@iee.email \
    --cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
    --cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).