Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> writes: > On 08/21/2015 03:21 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> Hmm, it occurs to me that a squash commit (or series of commits) followed >>> by a merge -s ours could have the advantages of both approaches: the >>> patches land on trunk in a sensible order, but the history is available. >> >> That would be worse, since changes are duplicated. > > How duplicated?
In the squashed commit and in the branch. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."
