Skip to content

Conversation

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

revert of

But reverting the individual commits, instead of the merge commit (not sure what's better?)

This reverts commit a232658.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
…rRule"

This reverts commit 5e34060.

Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>
@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member Author

@arkodg @mavenugo I wonder if we should use this approach; if I look at d070217, then git still says it's in master (but TBH, never checked if the same applies for other ways to revert)

git branch --contains 5e34060735b93be498375093269615cbf606ecf5 
...
master

@kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor

reverting the individual commits, instead of the merge commit (not sure what's better?)

I have a weak preference for reverting individual commits, but when I look into #2466 it seems like a fine approach to me as well.

git still says it's in master (but TBH, never checked if the same applies for other ways to revert)

Once committed, it will always be there, even after the revert, since it's basically a blockchain and you can't rewrite the history (unless, of course, you use git reset (and git push --force), which is something that should not ever be done unless it's your own private repo).

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member Author

Once committed, it will always be there, even after the revert, since it's basically a blockchain and you can't rewrite the history (unless, of course, you use git reset (and git push --force), which is something that should not ever be done unless it's your own private repo).

Ah, yes, I realised that; wasn't sure what git branch --contains would show (hoping it would be smart to tell if it's still in the branch (as in "not reverted") guess that's not easy))

@thaJeztah thaJeztah closed this Jan 26, 2021
@thaJeztah thaJeztah deleted the bump_alternative branch January 26, 2021 15:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants