On 05/08/2016 01:21 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 01:44:43PM +0800, cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote: >> Don't be crazy - I know many developer groups which dislike merge >> commits. That nonlinear work flow is just a mess long term. > > Really? What "mess" does it cause? > > Are things harder to bisect? Harder to determine what came before what? > Harder to do future development? Harder because it is unfamiliar > compared to the cvs workflow? > > Or just "messier" when you look at the graph of the tree? > > What is the _real_ reason that you don't like merges? > > thanks, > > greg k-h >
I don't have a strong -- or even clear -- opinion on the matter, but I could imagine it being a bother to see a bunch of "merge commit" commit messages in `git log` and not really have much to go on as far as "who submitted this, who approved it, what does it fix, etc". As far as I know, there's only the committer information and any GPG-signing that may have accompanied it, as we do in Gentoo. If I have any details wrong, please clarify. I've heard about a way to "redo" history in a git repository as well, especially before pushing. Could that be a way to mitigate merge commits, so they are more informative and conform to our commit message convention? Sincerely, a neutral party -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
