From 294ec009e91359f4563b65dc8e6e4dcd11634102 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:59:24 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] comment --- ...ent_1_babea9a16f25b471026732ea63dd78a8._comment | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/git-annex_branch_not_being_pushed_after_git-annex_forget/comment_1_babea9a16f25b471026732ea63dd78a8._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/git-annex_branch_not_being_pushed_after_git-annex_forget/comment_1_babea9a16f25b471026732ea63dd78a8._comment b/doc/bugs/git-annex_branch_not_being_pushed_after_git-annex_forget/comment_1_babea9a16f25b471026732ea63dd78a8._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..437613ee75 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/git-annex_branch_not_being_pushed_after_git-annex_forget/comment_1_babea9a16f25b471026732ea63dd78a8._comment @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 1""" + date="2015-09-15T15:56:46Z" + content=""" +"You may need to force git to push the branch to any git repositories not +running git-annex." -- git-annex-forget man page + +I guess bitbucket doesn't accept pushes that replace an existing branch +with one with a disconnected history. git push --force should sort it out. + +I'm not clear how this is a bug. Is there some change needed in the +documentation or perhaps in git-annex sync? +"""]]