Hi Niall, Le 22/09/2014 14:25, Niall Pemberton a écrit : > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Le 10/09/2014 11:43, Gilles a écrit : >> >>> This use case does not convince me at all: when working on a feature, >>> you always do it locally (modifying code, preparing unit tests), and >>> SVN certainly does not force you to experiment publicly; it's rather >>> the project's policy that forbids you to commit crappy code. :-) >> >> The advantage here is that you can split you local work into smaller >> commits before pushing them to the server. That makes the review easier >> by clearly separating the various steps of the implementation. It's also >> convenient to rollback some of the changes and correct them without >> starting from scratch. >> >> > Can you chose whether you retain the local commit history or not when > pushing it to the server?
Yes. If you simply push your work, all the individual commits will appear. If you prefer to simplify the history and have a single commit resuming all of your work, your can do this with git merge --squash. I never did it, so there may be a few intermediate steps, but the end result is that you can do it. So both cases are possible, you have the choice. best regards, Luc > > Niall > > > >> >>> [The advantages of "git" must be somewhere else.] >> >> Local commits should be one of them though, since it's on the SVN roadmap >> :) >> >> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3626 >> >> Emmanuel Bourg >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
