On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 7:07:06 AM UTC, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 2:34:00 AM UTC+1, Paul Masson wrote: >> >> Or is the current recommendation to always merge develop after every new >> beta? >> > > I think it's to use it sparingly. That the history from git log is gobbled > is IMO a git bug. > > perhaps we need a policy that for a positive review of a ticket branch things like merge commits must be squashed out....
> The branch I've been working on has been under review for some time, so I >> don't want to set things back by moving code around unnecessarily. >> > > There is the possibility of pushing a new branch (which gets complicated > if several > authorships must be preserved). > Well, one can always push a public branch, no? > I don't think it would strain trac resources too much. > > >> Besides, why shouldn't I always be able to go back and rebuild a previous >> branch without wiping everything clean? >> > > Because Sage is one of the most complicated software systems, and reality > rears its head quite a bit (with her beauty in the eye of the beholder). > > >> Trying to understand what goes wrong in the process. >> > > it's a build system that does not scale well... > We all do. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
