Nope. Once again, i am pushing for one issue -- one commit regardless of how many commits on a working branch history. Rebasing doesn't eliminate working branch history, just rewrites it on top of most recent master's.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > I think we are pushing for the same thing. > > If you rebase against master, your changes float above any master commits. > Judicious occasional use of interactive rebasing helps make that even more > true. > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I think that rebasing cleanly would help at least as much as squashing. > > > Both are probably good. > > > > > > > Rebasing doesn't get rid of intermediate commits, it only gets rid of > > merges. which means you will be left with commits like below sitting in > > your history anyway as actual commits without clean attribution -- and > I'd > > argue we don't want that > > > > * | commit cc9a70ebbdaceb8d5c2fcecd1a8cd9bee67e323e > > |/ Author: pferrel <[email protected]> > > | Date: Sat Jun 7 13:36:12 2014 -0700 > > | > > | added .DS_Store to gitignore for pushes from mac > > | > > >
