1 |
Michał Górny писал 2012-05-31 23:33: |
2 |
> On Thu, 31 May 2012 14:18:04 -0500 |
3 |
> William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 01:48:29PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
6 |
>> > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Robin H. Johnson |
7 |
>> > <robbat2@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
>> > > 1. |
9 |
>> > > Discussion on merge policy. Originally I thought we would |
10 |
>> > > disallow merge commits, so that we would get a cleaner history. |
11 |
>> > > However, it turns out that if the repo ends up being pushed to |
12 |
>> > > different places with slightly different histories, merges are |
13 |
>> > > absolutely going to be required to prevent somebody from having |
14 |
>> > > to rebase at least one of their sets of commits that are already |
15 |
>> > > pushed. |
16 |
>> > |
17 |
>> > Not sure I'm following, but I will be the first to admit that I'm |
18 |
>> a |
19 |
>> > git novice. Would this be aided by a convention, like only |
20 |
>> > committing to master on the gentoo official repository, and any |
21 |
>> > on-the-side work on places like github/etc stays in branches? |
22 |
>> > Those repositories would just keep getting fed commits on master |
23 |
>> > from the official repository. |
24 |
>> |
25 |
>> Iagree with this; I think we should ban merge commits on master. |
26 |
>> That |
27 |
>> would force everyone to rebase their work on current master before |
28 |
>> they commit to master which would make the history clean. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> What would git signing work with rebased commits? Would all of them |
31 |
> have to be signed once again? |
32 |
|
33 |
Commits itsels still will be signed |
34 |
-- |
35 |
Best Regards, |
36 |
Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov |
37 |
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, NRC Kurchatov Institute, |
38 |
Gatchina, Russia |
39 |
Department of Molecular and Radiation Biophysics |
40 |
Gentoo Team Ru |
41 |
Gentoo Linux Dev |
42 |
mailto:alexxyum@×××××.com |
43 |
mailto:alexxy@g.o |
44 |
mailto:alexxy@×××××××××××××.ru |