Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: williamh@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 19:59:47
Message-Id: CAGfcS_kZ=sYpz+_AMTRuFee35aaJGHs7f3A1fo58owBHZp+kYg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by "Michał Górny"
1 On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
2 > What would git signing work with rebased commits? Would all of them
3 > have to be signed once again?
4 >
5
6 The whole point of rebasing is to throw away history (which is either
7 good or bad based on your perspective).
8
9 So, if 14 devs spend 3 years and 2000 commits working on something in
10 a branch, and I commit it to master using a rebase, then all you'll
11 see in the master history is that rich0 committed 20k lines of code to
12 master on May 31st, and that would be signed by me.
13
14 I think that rebasing before merging is a pretty typical workflow
15 anyway - when you submit a patch to Linus, he doesn't really care that
16 you spent six months tweaking it - he just is getting a big blob of
17 code that either works or doesn't. Does all that sub-history really
18 matter? You could always push the branch to the repository if you
19 wanted to keep it on the side.
20
21 Rich

Replies