On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 02:41:54PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> What I've said is that the work is done in a separate branch (a feature
> branch). Then, all that needs to be done is a merge to the main branch
> seen as a single commit (e.g., for git, "git merge --no-ff"). That way,
> one doesn't see the dirty work done in the feature branch, just the
> merge.
> 
you're describing a squash merge. that's also not what we want - we want
*series* of clean patches (except in rare cases where a single atomic
commit is indeed sufficient).

Reply via email to