| 1 |
Dnia 2014-09-15, o godz. 07:21:35 |
| 2 |
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sunday 14 September 2014 15:42:15 hasufell wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Patrick Lauer: |
| 6 |
> > >> Are we going to disallow merge commits and ask devs to rebase local |
| 7 |
> > >> changes in order to keep the history "clean"? |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > Is that going to be sane with our commit frequency? |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > You have to merge or rebase anyway in case of a push conflict, so the |
| 12 |
> > only difference is the method and the effect on the history. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Currently... CVS allows you to run repoman on an outdated tree and push |
| 15 |
> > broken ebuilds with repoman being happy. Git will not allow this. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> iow, git doesn't allow people to work on more than one item at a time? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> That'd mean I need half a dozen checkouts just to emulate cvs, which somehow |
| 20 |
> doesn't make much sense to me ... |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I'd appreciate if you reduced FUD to minimum. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
What hasufell meant is that you normally don't have three year-old |
| 25 |
files lying around in checkout because you did 'cvs up -dP' in another |
| 26 |
directory. With git, you update everything. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
What you do locally, is totally unrelated. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Best regards, |
| 32 |
Michał Górny |
Archives