You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
0 commit comments