Matt McCutchen <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > When I'm rewriting history, "git push --force-with-lease" is a nice > safeguard compared to "git push --force", but it still assumes the > remote-tracking ref gives the old state the user wants to overwrite. > Tools that do an implicit fetch, assuming it to be a safe operation, > may break this assumption. In the worst case, Visual Studio Code does > an automatic fetch every 3 minutes by default [1], making > --force-with-lease pretty much reduce to --force. That's a big problem, but even without such tools, I find --force-with-lease without an argument to be pretty limited in usefulness. I like to type "git fetch" myself regularly, just to see what's new upstream before integrating it; this already breaks it. But even avoiding "git fetch" doesn't help if you are working on more than one branch at a time, because doing "git pull" on one branch will do an implicit "git fetch" on the other. I like the idea of git maintaining a separate "last integrated" commit for each branch, I think this could solve it in a nice way. I'm probably not qualified enough to work on this myself though, but I'm happy to give input if someone else wants to. -- Stefan Haller Berlin, Germany http://www.haller-berlin.de/