Comment by lmm
7 years ago
Create a feature branch, revert the revert, and then fix the problem. It sounds a little weird but it works fine.
7 years ago
Create a feature branch, revert the revert, and then fix the problem. It sounds a little weird but it works fine.
It’s a lot of paperwork to avoid a perfectly safe and normal git command.
No it isn't. You'd always want to create a feature branch so that you can PR the fix - it's a change going into master, it should go through the normal change-going-into-master review flow. And you'd always have to run some command to indicate that this was the branch where you wanted to undo what you'd done to master. That the command is called "revert" is a little weird, but it's no more paperwork than any other command would be.
To be fair, rebasing a shared branch really isn't all that safe. You can potentially make life hard for a lot of people.
That’s not fair. That’s fear, uncertainty, doubt. Those people pulling that shared branch will see a big honking warning message, which can easily be resolved if you communicate what’s happening and why you rebased the upstream.
When you say, it’s not safe, it sounds like you could lose work or someone could be hurt, when it’s more likely that the removed ancestors could be merged back in by someone not using ‘git pull —rebase’, or other devs being put out by having to resolve some conflicts. It’s not great, but it’s a far cry from unsafe or DANGEROUS! MUST AVOID! PUBLIC SHAMING!
2 replies →