[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn vs. git

From: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 09:23:32 -0400

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Andrew Reedick <jreedick_at_incomm.com> wrote:
> It’s been awhile, but isn’t changing the commit message (after a push)
> potentially problematic in git?

Yeah. It can get nasty. The "push --force" option is available, but
that's basically changing the history on what might be a central
repository, and it's the sort of operation that makes believers in
"thou shalt not touch the history" approach to source control very,
very upset. resolving discrepancies on previously synced copies of
that central repository can get nasty if you pull that sort of stunt.

The more common option is to edit the comments on the commit you *just
made locally*. It can be handy to set the date, the problem ticket
number, or to mention an additional change before making the push. And
it's especially handy to reset the "author" of a commit, because a
local commit is normally attributed to the local user on the local
host. If you're logged in as the "root" or "apache" user, to modify a
local configuration repository, it's useful to reset the "author" to
yourself before doing the push.

Resetting the "author" of a commit introduces additional dangers: for
Subversion, the "commit" is credited to the user connecting to the
Subversion server. For git, it can be reset locally, and people can
*lie* about who did the specific commit.
Received on 2017-07-26 15:23:40 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.