Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 12:28, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I mean that rejecting a fetch because upstream has weird history >> would make no one happy. > > Agreed. What about when the remote's history is rewritten, do we want > to just transplant the new history, or do we do a forced update of the > remote? I think treating it as a usual non-fast-forward update makes sense. Log messages could be an annoying special case, though, since people edit those a lot. Does svn store the original log message somewhere? (Please forgive my ignorance). If not, I suppose downstream can publish refs produced by "git replace" to cope. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html