4 ms·
> Anytime you've rebased but already pushed you would need to do so. And that's also unreasonable. Pushed history should be treated as immutable. If you broke
by ori_b 13y ago
> Anytime you've rebased but already pushed you would need to do so.
And that's also unreasonable. Pushed history should be treated as immutable. If you broke the build, push a revert commit, fix the issue, and resubmit. And then fix your tooling to recognize rollbacks.
- Hovertruck 13y agoI tend to treat the history of the master branch as immutable. Working with a remote branch that needs to stay up-to-date with master has, in my experience, required rebasing and force-pushing the branch.
- pseut 13y agoIn this case, the person probably thought he or she was pushing "feature-wip" or something similar after cleaning up that branch's history. Not necessarily unreasonable. If master is out of date then git push -f throws away any remote commits (under old behavior).