| 1 |
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 02:27:17AM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 2 |
> One more reason to use merge commits for pull requests: original |
| 3 |
> author commits with proper authorship will be retained. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Yes, I know that some people are unhappy with non-linear history, |
| 6 |
> but this is how git works, so there is nothing wrong with merge |
| 7 |
> commits for user-contributed changes. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Hi Andrew, |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I don't see this subject as valid reason to prefer merge commits over |
| 12 |
rebases. Personally I prefer linear history and rebases. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I had a commercial project in my practice which was based on Github, and |
| 15 |
other developers submitted pull requests. My workflow was to rebase the |
| 16 |
proposed changes onto mainline branch (which of course preserves |
| 17 |
authorship data), push the updated mainline branch to central repo, and |
| 18 |
close the PR manually. Not much of work, linear history, git metadata |
| 19 |
preserved. |
Archives