Re: Something wrong with next in main git repository?

["Jonathan del Strother" <maillist@steelskies.com>]

On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>  I've been keeping up with development only intermittently lately, and just got
>  a warning from git fetch (in my git directory) that the update to my 'next'
>  tracking branch was rejected as not being a fast forward.
>
>  I renamed my current up/next to up/oldnext and fetched the latest next, so I
>  had up/oldnext and up/next to compare.  I'm probably concerned over nothing,
>  but I can't find any mention of a rewind of next in the mailing list.
>
>  As far as I can tell a whole series of merges has just vanished.  For
>  information:
>
>   $ git rev-parse up/next up/oldnext
>   0bdd7328c801101d752d0dfc9976a50651738897
>   38fd5a1b23780381c3b6987c730f5ea3d8e1fc7f
>
>   $ git merge-base up/next up/oldnext
>   ef5b9d6e2286630bf8afb5bdf1c6e3356f3d50c7
>
>  Apart from all the merges that have vanished, some revisions have vanished too
>  (vanished in the sense, they aren't on the branch any more).  i.e.
>
>   $ git log --no-merges --pretty=oneline up/next..up/oldnext
>   33369889 Revert "Support builtin aliases"
>   3a569a00 Revert "parse_commit_buffer: don't parse invalid commits"
>   1b1b2346 parse_commit_buffer: don't parse invalid commits
>   f0a31f58 Avoid redundant declaration of missing_target()
>   ... etc ...
>   0edad442 adjust_shared_perm: chmod() only when needed.
>   69a47520 Revert "pack-objects: use of version 3 delta is now optional."
>   394737eb pack-objects: use of version 3 delta is now optional.
>
>  Have all these commits gone missing?  I'm certain that someone other than me
>  would have noticed this sort of loss, so is it something I've done wrong or
>  misunderstood?
>

'next' now gets rewound after each feature release, to try and give a
clean slate to base new work off of.  Is that perhaps what you're
seeing?