Add force option --force-with-lease
Git push --force overwrites a remote branch with your local branch.
Git push --force-with-lease is a safer option that will not overwrite any work on the remote branch if more commits were added to the remote branch (by another team-member or coworker or what have you). It ensures you do not overwrite someone elses work by force pushing.
As a user, I want GitKraken to support using --force-with-lease with a checkbox.
Comments: 8
-
25 Jun, '21
Max MoldmannForce with lease could be the default behavior. Only when it fails GitKraken could ask if you still want to do a Force push.
-
24 Nov, '21
Matteo ContriExactly like "pull" that has multiple choices, "push" should have "force" and "force-with-lease"
-
25 Nov, '21
Ryan AtwoodThis would be immensely helpful given the way we use git on our team
-
22 Dec, '21
NaufalAgreed with Matteo's suggestion, have "push" with a drop-down option in the gui.
-
19 Jan
jfo100% Agreed. Gitkraken should not contribute to work being lost on a branch if it does not need to.
-
11 May
Nate HartPlease add this! You could add it as another button in the force dialog:
1. I push a rebased commit
2. Popup has a "Force Push With Lease" option
ex. 'feature/foo' is behind 'origin/feature/foo'. Update your branch by doing a pull. [Pull (fast forward if possible)] [Force Push] [Force Push With Lease] [Cancel]
3. Now we are safe! -
18 May
FrancisForce with lease is not _always_ safe. See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/59309402/is-git-push-force-with-lease-always-safe
Especially since GitKraken continually does `git fetch` in the background, using lease will often give a false sense of security because the local remote has already been updated to match the actual remote. Using it by default for all pushed would be a bad idea.
What I'd like to see some work to streamline the rebase workflow - right now, a rebase always requires clicking the scary red "Force Push" button to update the remote branch. Junior devs always screw this up at first.
I think the proper fix would be an option to change the default Push mode to use `--force-with-lease --force-if-includes` which I _think_ should be safe (needs some experimentation). -
17 Aug
Egor HansAbsolute +1 for Nate's approach. Granted, not perfectly safe as Francis pointed out, but safe enough for most use cases. (And I'm pretty sure that Francis misunderstood this, thinking that Force with Lease would be the default even before the point of where a force push is necessary at all - which is not how this would be done.)