See https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos :

-----
changelog.dd 	Revert "Use @monarchdodra's suggestion to replace ; with {}"
-----

Did someone write to master again by accident? changelog.dd should not exist in the Phobos repo (this was an outdated file). There are other files that were touched in that commit, but I'm not sure if anything else should be removed.

We should really **always** use pull requests, otherwise these types of commits slip in without notice. I keep seeing people say "Oh I've fixed this in master just 10 minutes ago with a force push". And then crap like this[1] happens. There seem to be more than one person pushing directly to master, I've seen it done by Walter, Daniel, Kenji, Martin, etc. Please guys, stop pushing upstream.

[1]: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/53070883.6000806@digitalmars.com

"Andrej Mitrovic"  wrote in message news:fbsvnfnncukdtkftcffj@forum.dlang.org...

> We should really **always** use pull requests, otherwise these types of commits slip in without notice. I keep seeing people say "Oh I've fixed this in master just 10 minutes ago with a force push". And then crap like this[1] happens. There seem to be more than one person pushing directly to master, I've seen it done by Walter, Daniel, Kenji, Martin, etc. Please guys, stop pushing upstream.

I agree.  I wish we could disable all changes to master not done by merging a pull request (can we?).  Unfortunately sometimes pushing directly to master is unavoidable, usually because Walter broke it.

I strongly recommend everyone with push-access to the main repo set their upstream remote to read-only. 

On 2/25/14, Daniel Murphy <yebbliesnospam@gmail.com> wrote:
> I strongly recommend everyone with push-access to the main repo set their upstream remote to read-only.

I didn't even know this was a feature, can you elaborate how to do this?

On Tuesday, 25 February 2014 at 13:33:56 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 2/25/14, Daniel Murphy <yebbliesnospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I strongly recommend everyone with push-access to the main repo set their
>> upstream remote to read-only.
>
> I didn't even know this was a feature, can you elaborate how to do this?

I think a trivial way to do that is to change the protocol to git://, as you can only pull over it.

It looks like you can also override the push URL, and if it is set to an invalid value, you'll effectively disable pushing to that remote:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10270027/can-i-mark-a-git-remote-as-read-only

"Vladimir Panteleev"  wrote in message news:unhchiuzxwoniwuaqhsv@forum.dlang.org...
> > I didn't even know this was a feature, can you elaborate how to do this?
>
> I think a trivial way to do that is to change the protocol to git://, as you can only pull over it.
>
> It looks like you can also override the push URL, and if it is set to an invalid value, you'll effectively disable pushing to that remote:
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10270027/can-i-mark-a-git-remote-as-read-only

Yeah, not exactly a git feature, but it works.