From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Recording merges after repo conversion Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:57:12 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <200710311537.30384.johan@herland.net> <200710311621.09845.johan@herland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Peter Karlsson , Lars Hjemli , Benoit SIGOURE To: Johan Herland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 31 16:58:17 2007 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 1InFxP-0008Bc-DX for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:58:15 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757878AbXJaP57 (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:57:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757759AbXJaP57 (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:57:59 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:52499 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757339AbXJaP56 (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:57:58 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 31 Oct 2007 15:57:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp044) with SMTP; 31 Oct 2007 16:57:56 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+guMcfs3ig4N8KvgC+CYcj8hFAmKtEFPssPp4hH6 3rLuWoOu0kKB56 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <200710311621.09845.johan@herland.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Johan Herland wrote: > Well, to a certain degree (and depending on your level of paranoia), > you're always responsible for the code entering your own repo, and you > could always set up a hook disallowing ".gitgrafts" (or whatever it > would be called) from entering your repo. Yeah, right. And you could also stay in an oxygen tent the whole time to avoid being infected with some virus. Seriously, your proposal does not make any sense. If you have to set up a hook to get the _sane_ behaviour, something is really wrong. So I do not really understand why you brought up this idea here and now. I understand that you wanted to end this discussion, but I could _not_ let your statement stand uncorrected. Ciao, Dscho