From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fortymile.utu.fi (fortymile.utu.fi [130.232.247.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69F773B8120 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 08:46:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=130.232.247.4 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787734019; cv=none; b=gDIkoW2dzMPhyfIem+p20lgPGoLspLh3gb2LQyUWqsLUHFwgWlw8Pco8f558iGBv8iudhdHo0A7ERFSdSYCX6koJHR8kKtPYsTLK+YA/BT00+V1d5AVEtSfaHHPKG1rxhxe1SSFS68VojjM4oRAuGq1T/iPon7VTz0NSbRm2+q4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787734019; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hePMm03X5WAL+XoIEfyDita1gOrZEfh8pySAgHaI0Mw=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mhjRutKCqN7I5PHZpKgb2vKZuAjuoz+Inr5aOWUyCD0XEl9z49BrB6rF8DyglzYkVOSjmjp35ZZvi/41NeG2AMbj5a624QaYp42OhQBSDIYcVINZeMCxGKqLrHYSJrhH4qG5Tj57MjXvvkgiZtNJjF2ZL/+Ducd/q/TcWl2yFNU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=utu.fi; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=utu.fi; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=utu.fi header.i=@utu.fi header.b=ZYuBXrnb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=130.232.247.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=utu.fi Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=utu.fi Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=utu.fi header.i=@utu.fi header.b="ZYuBXrnb" Received: from smtp-04.utu.fi (smtp-04.utu.fi [130.232.207.47]) by fortymile.utu.fi with ESMTPS id 67Q8kgS7005428-67Q8kgS9005428 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:46:42 +0300 Received: from ex19-06.utu.fi ([130.232.247.46]) by smtp-04.utu.fi with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1wz9HO-00GLnJ-OT; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:46:42 +0300 Received: from localhost (86.50.95.90) by ex19-06.utu.fi (130.232.247.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.2562.46; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:46:42 +0300 Received: from localhost (localhost [local]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id ed368bfc; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 08:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 11:46:41 +0300 From: Tuomas Ahola To: Harald Nordgren CC: Junio C Hamano , Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] branch: protect local upstreams from -d Message-ID: <20260826084641.tb2NX%taahol@utu.fi> In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: s-nail v14.9.22 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-ClientProxiedBy: ex19-12.utu.fi (130.232.247.52) To ex19-06.utu.fi (130.232.247.46) X-FEAS-BEC-Info: WlpIGw0aAQkEARIJHAEHBlJSCRoLAAEeDUhZUEhYSFhIWkhZXkguLT4lWFxYWFhYWFBeUVxfSFhISFlbSBwJCQAHBCgdHB1GDgFIWUhaXEgACRoJBAwGBxoMDxoNBigP BQkBBEYLBwVIWEhaSFlcSFlbWEZaW1pGWlhfRlxfSFBIWEhYSFtIWEhYSFhIWVFIDwEcKB4PDRpGAw0aBg0ERgcaD0hYSFpaSA8BHA8BHA8JDA8NHCgPBQkBBEYLBwVI WEhZX0gPARwbHA0aKBgHCgcQRgsHBUhY X-FEAS-Client-IP: 130.232.207.47 X-FE-Last-Public-Client-IP: 130.232.207.47 X-FE-Policy-ID: 3:5:2:SYSTEM X-FE-Hostname: fortymile.utu.fi DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=utu.fi; s=out-utu-v3; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type; bh=kY0Kji1WP5L4lDJTr7azStLtZyLgfaLzZHRQQ5wmGpU=; b=ZYuBXrnb+xW1T8LCqBZTxt4EibXehV7zqQATAw2cTjNPg69a8JrnjPBW/FfUf5TpcxSjg0+jRl3Y fwFEqgZ0cMo5H6MPcLLPvtrqD02jPnNM6u/ir5SowT84Ff22z9peg0L5wHfzp7dnndt2i//+A7vw t13+LbVJ1gm24ok7xEulrrBXXev1Xh9tMxFtPs5OQLkfVDXqLoQAVGmRWM6NXMFwTQheWFV5oFPv Nx0qg+2Lx7Gb/IUpeacOUhwi0ASwJ3baN85DN6YzVtq6sX6+g9opQb+IIeP5oygBsB534otD8beJ Ni/Cm5cABZMh9wJDi36FDgNxSOy3AED9Uuvrbw== Harald Nordgren wrote: > Hmm, it makes sense what you are saying, but I could have sworn that > you asked for this (likely some very different version from this) when > I was working on delete-merged, i.e. to extend branch protections to > '-d' as well. Phillip brought it up recently as well. Maybe I > misunderstood. > > > Harald In Junio wrote: } [...] } } Do we also need the same safety around "git branch -d feature1" by } the way? The "-d" option with safety checks the same "is feature1 } already merged (to its upstream)?" condition, so it can protect the } feature2 branch the same way, by saying either "oops, you cannot } delete feature1 because you still have other branches like feature2 } that depend on it", or "ok, featur2 used to depend on feature1, but } because we are deleting feature1 based on it being in origin/master, } we will make feature2 depend on origin/master from now on". } Harald, perhaps that's the passage you thought of? -- Tuomas