Nikolaus Rath writes ("Re: Survey: git packaging practices / repository
format"):
> On May 29 2019, Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> wrote:
> > The thing his approach really seems to have going for it is that he
> > gives up on the debian history fast forwarding and instead rebases a lot
> > for a cleaner history.
> > If we could figure out a way to collaborate on something like that well,
> > it might be a very interesting tool to have.
The difficulty with this as a collaboration approach is that you can't
tell whether a rebase is "the newest", at least without a lot of
additional information. That additional information is the "clutter"
if you like which the "cleaner" history doesn't contain.
> This sounds similar to the (now unmaintained) git-dpm to me.
Both git-debrebase and git-dpm use a special history structure to
record what the most recent rebase is. Obviously I prefer
git-debrebase since I wrote it - using a different data model - even
after I knew about git-dpm and its data model. But maybe this isn't
the thread for that advocacy conversation.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
