Hi Kohei, Miklos, On 2010-11-18 at 08:28 -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> > > And continuously pulling from the master branch is very common when you > > > are in a long-term feature branch, and messing up the branch history is > > > the last thing you want to see happen while the branch is still being > > > worked on. > > > > That was added by me. I asked on this list and it was supposed to be a > > good idea: > > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2010-October/000470.html > > > > It's commit 7f24ede9ec00fea0482abc74a131d41c5578a915 in build.git. If > > the consensus is that this is just annoying, I can revert it, sure. > > IMNSO this is not just annoying, but plain dangerous, because mis-use of > rebasing may end up removing your local changes (or remote changes). > Now that we promote the concept of feature branches, I hope we can > revert this. Sorry for that, I did not see all the consequences :-( It really sounds as reverting is the safer choice - Miklos, can you please do that? We do not have to be concerned about the merge commits that much any more, because we will always have those with the merges from OpenOffice.org [and have to get used to them ;-)], so few 'git pull's when 'git pull -r' might have been used will not be that much a problem. [For me, the best would be a 'read my mind' kind of pull - if you pull, and have just few commits up to 2-3 days old, and no merge commit among them, it would do 'pull -r', otherwise 'pull --no-rebase' :-) I'll try to improve the merge hook warning that way, so that it warns only in the cases where 'pull -r' is really the better choice; currently it shouts too often.] Regards, Kendy _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
