Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Now, to be honest, I thought that this mode would merit a new option > rather than piggy-backing on top of `--force-with-lease`. The reason is > that `--force-with-lease` targets a slightly different use case than mine: > it makes sure that we do not overwrite remote refs unless we already had a > chance to inspect them. > > In contrast, my workflow uses `git pull --rebase` in two or more separate > worktrees, e.g. when developing a patch on two different Operating > Systems, I frequently forget to pull (to my public repository) on one > side, and I want to avoid force-pushing in that case, even if VS Code (or > I, via `git remote update`) fetched the ref (but failing to rebase the > local branch on top of it). > ... > So I think that the original `--force-with-lease` and the mode you > implemented target subtly different use cases that are both valid, and > therefore I would like to request a separate option for the latter. I agree that the use case in the second paragraph above does not fit what the "force with lease" option is meant to solve. You do not even want to be forcing in the workflow so "--force-with-anything" is a bad name for the mode of operation, if I am reading you right.
