Please, let's stop this fetish about non-ff merges. If you like non-ff merges and linear history it's entirely up to your taste. Nothing "gets confused" about merge commits, and if your tooling gets confused then I strongly urge you to get better tools — which is the whole point of switching to GitLab.
Ostensibly, the whole GitHub userbase gets along with it just fine, and that is larger than the GNOME contributors base by many, many factors of ten. Let's not confuse a personal maintainer preference with a technical difficulty. Ciao, Emmanuele. On 27 June 2017 at 14:08, Michael Catanzaro <mike.catanz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Carlos Soriano <csori...@gnome.org> wrote: >> >> Expect Nautilus and librsvg (with Federico) to move to the pilot program >> this week. > > > Cool. I would just suggest making sure that your interns are careful not to > push a non-ff merge (i.e. not to use merge requests), since that will > confuse nautilus's git history until the end of time. A server hook to block > this would be useful, since I expect the number of projects that want linear > history is much higher than the number of projects that want to allow merge > commits. > > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- https://www.bassi.io [@] ebassi [@gmail.com] _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
