On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 08:33:05PM +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > Op 14-3-2012 14:11, Pavel Sanda schreef: > >Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > >>>I see that in some cases of 2. additional commit are applied but we > >>>shouldn't value clean commit history at such high rates. > >>These additional commits are the number 1 reason for me to propose what I > >>proposed. To my liking, there are way too many commits that fix a typo, fix > >>a warning on a different platform, fix a commit error, fix whitespace, fix > >>monolithic build, commit a forgotten file, etc. > >Yes, that's where we disagree. I don't see these additional commits as > >good enough reason to drown people in branching mania. Unless someone > >develops new nifty feature or particularly tough bug, he shouldn't > >recognize there is some difference between svn and git. > > You seem to have an aversion to branches, while I can't work without > them anymore.
There is a difference between (a) using branches for work (implementing stuff, checking out other people's work etc) and (b) having branches in the main repo. (a) does not imply (b). Andre'
