Re: emacs.git 'master' reset

> Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2026 16:31:11 +0200
> From: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
> 
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2026 at 04:20:26PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > If you seriously suggest that everyone who has a local clone of
> > emacs.git should do the above dance, then I find it hard to believe,
> > and hope it is very far from reality.
> 
> This local dance is only necessary when one commits to a "main" branch
> while working along (main meaning that there are other people outside
> doing the same).
> 
> What I usually do is to work in local work branches (and possibly
> publishing them, depending on whether others want to see what I'm
> up to).
> 
> Only when something is agreed upon to go into such a main branch it
> is merged (and pushed, as quickly as possible) to avoid the kind of
> situation you described.
> 
> In bigger projects, there's only one person (or a closely-knit group)
> who is supposed to touch those "main" branches, and typically /only/
> by merging.

Is this really relevant to the case in point?  The case in point is
people who, like me, have the master branch checked out in a local
clone of emacs.git, and that local clone is currently in a state it
was before the upstream was reset to before the commit which mentioned
Claude.  There are no other complications.