| 1 |
On 07/05/2015 06:10 AM, C Bergström wrote: |
| 2 |
>>> 5) More about linear commits and "history" - I need to double check, |
| 3 |
>>> but I don't think rebase changes the actual commit date (I could be |
| 4 |
>>> mistaken). |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> You are mistaken, and should have double checked before you argued. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Arguing without checking makes you look bad. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> How? I didn't claim to know and clearly not knowing didn't seem |
| 11 |
> important (to me). I'm not trying to overstate anything. I'm just |
| 12 |
> trying to passionately bring this up. I ***wish*** someone with some |
| 13 |
> guts would actually take charge of this on the gentoo side, have a |
| 14 |
> vote or make some executive decision which is stronger than this wimpy |
| 15 |
> policy we have now. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Most of what you brought up wasn't really useful critique, but rather |
| 19 |
noise based on your personal frustration with git. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
This thread is not about giving lectures on how git works. We appreciate |
| 22 |
useful comments on the git workflow. But in order to give useful |
| 23 |
comments, you have to know and understand the project and how it works |
| 24 |
internally. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
There will be a sh*tload of developer, feature and whatnot branches. It |
| 27 |
is just insane to tell everyone to unconditionally do rebases |
| 28 |
everywhere. You haven't even commented on a fraction of the resulting |
| 29 |
problems. So please lets stop this discussion and move on. |
Archives