#git bot interface

History of !rewriting_public_history

• @!rewrite
  By Vampire0 at 2014-07-22 10:09:55
• Rewriting public history is usually bad. Everyone who has pulled the old history have to do work (and you'll have to tell them to), so it's infinitely better to just move on. If you must, you can use `git push -f` to force (and the remote may reject that, anyway). See http://goo.gl/waqum
  By canton7 at 2013-09-24 20:46:56
• Rewriting public history is usually bad. Everyone who has pulled the old history have to do work (and you'll have to tell them to). If you must, you can use `git push -f` to force (and the remote may reject that, anyway). See http://goo.gl/waqum
  By nevik at 2013-06-01 10:06:05
• Rewriting public history is usually bad. Everyone who has pulled the old history have to do work (and you'll have to tell them to). If you must, you can use `git push -f` to force (and the remote may reject that, anyway). See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase.html#_recovering_from_upstream_rebase
  By rking at 2013-02-09 14:59:29
• Rewriting public history is usually a very bad idea. Everyone who has pulled the old history will have to jump through hoops(and you have to tell them to), so it's normally better to just move on without rewriting. That said, you can use `git push -f` to force your new history through(the remote may reject it anyway). See http://goo.gl/ghbUz for helpful tips
  By EugeneKay at 2013-02-09 14:56:10
• Rewriting public history is usually a very bad idea. Everyone who has pulled the old history will have to jump through hoops(and you have to tell them to), so it's normally better to just move on without rewriting. That said, you can use `git push -f` to force your new history through(the remote may reject it anyway). See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase.html#_recovering_from_upstream_rebase for helpful tips
  By EugeneKay at 2013-02-09 14:53:59
• Rewriting public history is a very bad idea. Anyone else who may have pulled the old history will have to jump through hoops (and you have to tell them to), so it's infinitely better to just move on without rewriting. That said, you can use `git push -f` to force your new history through (may get rejected, though). See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase.html#_recovering_from_upstream_rebase
  By EugeneKay at 2013-02-09 14:48:43
• Rewriting public history is usually a very bad idea. Anyone else who may have pulled the old history will have to jump through hoops (and you have to tell them to), so it's typically much better to just move on without rewriting. That said, you can use `git push -f` to force your new history through (may get rejected, though). See
  By aspiers at 2013-01-26 21:01:44
• Rewriting public history is a very bad idea. Anyone else who may have pulled the old history will have to jump through hoops (and you have to tell them to), so it's infinitely better to just move on without rewriting. That said, you can use `git push -f` to force your new history through (may get rejected, though). See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase.html#_recovering_from_upstream_rebase
  By jast at 2012-09-20 09:36:11
• Rewriting public history is a very bad idea. Anyone else who may have pulled the old history will have to jump through hoops (and you have to tell them to), so it's infinitely better to just move on without rewriting. That said, you can use `git push -f` to force rewriting (the server may reject it, though). See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase.html#_recovering_from_upstream_rebase
  By jast at 2012-09-20 09:34:42
• Rewriting public history is a very bad idea. Anyone else who may have pulled the old history will have to `git pull --rebase` and even worse things if they have tagged or branched, so you must publish your humiliation so they know what to do. You will need to `git push -f` to force the push. The server may not allow this. See receive.denyNonFastForwards (git-config)
  By jast at 2012-09-20 09:31:49
• Rewriting public history is a very bad idea. Anyone else who may have pulled the old history will have to `git pull --rebase` and even worse things if they have tagged or branched, so you must publish your humiliation so they know what to do. You will need to `git push -f` to force the push. The server may not allow this. See receive.denyNonFastForwards (git-config)
  By SethRobertson at 2011-12-14 17:15:05