On 10/7/2015 12:26 PM, Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
Le 07/10/15 15:54, Agustín K-ballo Bergé a écrit :
On 10/7/2015 10:27 AM, Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
The purpose of this thread is to have a better idea of the practices of boost, also wrt. a potential nondestructive hard reset (non destructive in the sense that the commits have been cherry picked on appropriate topic branches).
So far, 1 is against :) (but since you are an experienced git user, you would not mind neither to reset boost.test).
Since you are counting, make that 2. A force push has already happen once in the past, unintentionally, and it was a disruptive process not only for developers but also for external test runners.
I am curious how external test runners are impacted. Do you have more details on this?
Test runners are not necessarily prepared to deal with history rewrites, since those are a frowned upon practice in "public" branches (I'm surprised it's even being considered here). A force push would cause spurious failures in those runners, which forces (pun intended) someone to look at it, notice that someone misbehaved, decide on a fix, pester the sysadmin for weeks until the fix is applied, etc. At least, that's how it went last time. Regards, -- Agustín K-ballo Bergé.- http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com