Hi @tripleee! There's no rush, but if you have a moment, I'd like your opinion on github.com/Charcoal-SE/SmokeDetector/pull/7727; I intentionally included only one blogspot change, in order to gain some confidence that I could make more changes next time without losing people's intervening watches. Do you feel confident that it's OK and I should include the rest of the blogspot changes in this PR, or can/should we merge this one first?
I get those when I rebase past the merge point (git rebase -i HEAD~15 when my own branch only has 12 commits since the branch point, for example) but I guess there are other scenarios where that could happen
in very brief, if you touch a commit, it will get a new hash, and look to Git like a new commit
if you branched off your earlier branch, you will still have the history from that, which will have diverged from what I merged because I made a squash commit which replaced all your commits with a single one
I'll try to summarize briefly, but might forget a step or something; one possible fix is to rename the branch, switch to master, pull down the latest upstream version, create a new branch with the name of your PR's branch, cherry-pick the actual commit you want to have in the PR, and force push
force pushes should make you slightly nervous, but as long as the old branch is still there with a different name, you can rename it back and force push again to go back to where you started
another nice safety measure is to create a new local branch to play around in until you are confident that you know how it works
but none of this is of any significance really; I can merge this here and now if you like
ok! I did try to start a new branch, but I probably left myself in the old branch while doing so, or something like that. I intended to start fresh, so that it'd be cleaner -- but obviously failed somehow :) just to give you an idea of how 20th century I am over here, I've just been saving the modified file in /tmp so I can copy it back, because I don't know what I'm doing! :D
I would prefer another squash merge just to flatten the history and not include the repeated merges etc, but other options are certainly on the table as well if you prefer
@tripleee I really don't want to interrupt dinner, but I'm super curious if it works cleanly and does not lose any of the watches people have put in, in the meantime
do whatever merge makes the most sense to you, I have zero preferences
yeah, though in some sense it's a complication; if you want to accept both additions then you need to merge them in some order and if it weren't for the timestamps it wouldn't matter in which order
the automatic PRs from chat are nice because they select an alternate merge algorithm which basically just says appending to the end of a file is always fine
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Blacklisted website in body and Blacklisted website in answer Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
@Spevacus That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
Hmm. Should we add this website to the watchlist as well even though I don't think it's been seen in a post before? The other website (techiewiz.com) redirects to it.
