On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:19PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 09:29AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Looks like now we can put "git branch deletion data loss" fiction to > > rest. > > > > > > > > > > I think that I am willing to say that the entirely reasonable git branch > > > detail loss QUESTION has been answered. > > > > > > I don't think that recasting it as a fiction is helpful because it tends > > to > > > polarize the conversation by implying that the question was made up as > > some > > > sort of propaganda ploy that had to be defeated by righteous opponents. > > > > No implications of a propaganda ploy, Ted - sorry if it looked that way. > > However, stories about how one thinks a software application should work is > > exactly that - a fiction ;) > > > > Cos, > > I am basing my questions on comments you made earlier [1]. To wit: > > After a quick walk through the master log I see that a bunch of the > > questionable commits are resulted from the dev. branches histories not > > being properly squashed before the feature is merged into the master. > > > My reading of your meaning here is that histories are expected to be > squashed, thus losing historical detail.
'histories are expected to be squashed' before the merge != 'existing histories of the shared branches are expected to be squashed' I guess we fell into the proverbial email-pit of semantical loss. > So this isn't a fiction, nor am I uninformed about how git works. This is > about questions that were raised based on how presumably well-informed > insiders describe the process combined with an examination of recent JIRA's > and the mailing list. > > As a side issue, I don't think that it helps to describe the other > participants in a conversation with heavily loaded terms and phrases like > "fiction" or "stories" or "how one thinks ... application should work". > Please credit other people in this conversation with good intent and with > technical competence. There are real questions being discussed here and > distracting the conversation from the content-rich answers that can resolve > those questions isn't helpful. Wasn't aiming to hurt anyone, Ted - see above ;) Besides, 'fiction' isn't a lewd word, last time I've checked. Cheers, Cos --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
