Re: I just pushed master into emacs-27

[Amin Bandali <bandali@gnu.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1564 bytes --]

dick.r.chiang@gmail.com writes:

> AB> I suggest we all STOP pushing anything to any branches of the
> emacs.git AB> repository *immediately*
>
> This is unduly alarmist.  What happens in other branches is
> independent of the emacs-27 branch.
>

I've been under the impression that in a Git repo, branches are
lightweight pointers to commits stored in the repo.  As such, my thought
process was that if Nico's commits have had a more global impact (on the
entire emacs.git repo) than just emacs-27, we may want to consider
having Savannah hackers restore an earlier snapshot of the entire repo
on the server side.  With that in mind, my suggestion to temporarily
suspend any pushes to the repo was so that we minimize changes that may
have to be re-pushed if it is decided that restoring emacs.git on the
server is necessary.

That said, I'm no git expert, and I certainly was not trying to sound
"alarmist".  If all of this can 'simply' be reversed by a force push and
without incurring any costs to emacs.git's internal state on Savannah,
and as if this never happened, then great.  I'm no fan of incurring
unnecessary work onto the Savannah hackers and/or the FSF sysadmins.

>
> AB> its emacs-27 branch on Savannah irreversibly messed up /
> cluttered? 
>
> Minimally, M. Petton (and probably others) will have a reflog commit with
> emacs27's last pristine state before the force push, which he could "git
> checkout -B" and re-force-push.  Such is the distributed ethos of git, a
> virtue Linus never fails to remind us of.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 853 bytes --]