I did not fully understand what you meant. Are you talking about the merge commit that can be created when a PR is merged? Or, are you talking about a merge commit that is added to a PR when a conflict is solved by its author(s)?
I do not have problems with the first type of merge commits. However, I think we should not allow the second type to get into our code base. On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 7:45 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Devs, > > I see a lot of merge master to branch commits appearing on PRs. This is > against prior (non-hard) agreements on how we work. It is getting to be the > daily practice so; > How do we feel about > 1. not using merge commits anymore? > 2. merging back as a way of solving conflicts? > and > Do we need to make a policy of it or do we let it evolve, at the risk of > having more hard to track feature/version matrices? > > -- > Daan > -- Rafael Weingärtner
