For my use case: If there is more than one commit on a branch, then that is intentional history on my part. :) So yes.
-eric On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: >> BTW, do you typically have useful history on these branches? >> Typically the reason to preserve history is for commit logs (which we >> drop when we commit the branch as a squash) or for merges (which we're >> breaking because we're rebasing). >> It would be a lot faster if it could forward-port a branch as a single >> commit instead of multiple. > > No, I usually don't have useful history in my local branches (most of > the time I upload to codereview after every commit anyway). > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
