Re: Caution when removing git branches

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Caution when removing git branches
Date: 2011-01-27 17:14:41
Message-ID: 201101271714.p0RHEfR21845@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > On 01/27/2011 11:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Given that nobody is supposed to push temporary branches to the master
> >> repo anyway, an intended branch removal should be a pretty darn rare
> >> event.
>
> > Pushing a local topic branch by mistake seems much more likely to me.
>
> Yeah, that's probably true.
>
> > Some protection against that mightn't be a bad idea. Maybe for example a
> > check on the branch name?
>
> If we *don't* install branch-removal defenses on the server, then it's
> easy enough to clean up an erroneous branch push. Only if we do that
> does this scenario become a problem. I find myself agreeing with Robert
> that we may be creating an issue where none exists.
>
> At this point my vote is to leave it alone until and unless we see that
> people actually make this type of mistake regularly.

OK, I posted the information just so people would be aware of this issue
--- I didn't expect it to be common or something we needed to protect
against.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-01-27 17:17:02 Upcoming back-branch updates
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2011-01-27 17:14:18 Re: Caution when removing git branches