martin f krafft <madd...@debian.org> writes: > also sprach Thomas Koch <tho...@koch.ro> [2011.08.01.1914 +0200]: > > So as a variation of the described workflow you can establish > > a special branch that holds references to all feature branch > > commits in its history. > > This comes about ¾ of the way to the history pollution done by TopGit.
I consider it very useful information, when needed. It's only pollution if you let it be so. > Not only would users potentially get confused by this additional > branch (which is an implementation detail), it would also get in the > way in gitk output (cf. pristine-tar) and annoy even the unconfused. That's an argument not for hobbling a useful branching-and-merging workflow, but for improving the output of those programs. Advocate with Git (and other VCSen) to hide merged revisions by default, the way Bazaar does. -- \ “Not using Microsoft products is like being a non-smoker 40 or | `\ 50 years ago: You can choose not to smoke, yourself, but it's | _o__) hard to avoid second-hand smoke.” —Michael Tiemann | Ben Finney
pgp9SVK4ymoTo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
