this PR comes from more than 1 individual, if we squash merge we'll not be able to attribute the contribution of those individuals.
+1 to rebase merge to preserve history On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> wrote: > One of the main reason for a rebase merge is that it preserves the commit > history of the MXNet.jl package contributors, and given that the project > has been evolved since 2015 and has always been a high-quality language > module for MXNet. > > I think we should take an exception here to preserve the commit history of > each individual contributors to the Julia binding and welcome them to the > community. > > Tianqi > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:55 PM Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > wrote: > > > In this particular case, I would suggest rebase and merge. > > > > The main reasoning is that the commit log of the Julia binding is not > > simple WIP commits, every commit there has been done through testcases > and > > it is important for us to respect the developer of the effort. It is also > > good to trace back the history of the commits more easily. > > > > Tianqi > > > > > > Tianqi > > > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 5:34 PM Carin Meier <carinme...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Chiyuan, > >> > >> Thanks for the prompt to find some clarity of the pros and cons of > each. I > >> think that will help drive us to the right decision. I think some of > those > >> reasons are the ones you listed. I will take a stab below at outlining > >> what > >> I see. Feel free to chime in if I missed any. > >> > >> *Squash and Merge* > >> *Pros* - It is the project standard > >> - It will provide one commit for the feature and lessen the > need > >> for 700+ commits rebased on top of master. > >> - It is easier for a user to do git log to browse commits and > see > >> what was features were added. > >> *Cons* - I don't know how github would handle squashing all those > commit > >> messages into one. Will it be too much? > >> - You lose the granularity of the features individual > commits > >> > >> *Rebase and Merge* > >> * Pros *- You don't have a huge commit message with one commit > >> - You do have the granularity of the individual features of > the > >> commit > >> * Cons *- It is not the project standard > >> - You have 700+ commits on top of master that might be harder > >> to > >> see the ones that went in right before. (like someone browsing commits) > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:12 PM Chiyuan Zhang <plus...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Carin, > >> > > >> > Can you clarify the pros and cons of the two approaches? Is the main > >> > concern here about logistics (e.g. preserving the history of the > >> original > >> > repo and developments) or technical issue (e.g. using squash might end > >> up > >> > with a huuuuge commit message that might be difficult or hard to > >> handle)? > >> > > >> > I think it might not be very likely that someone is going to cherry > pick > >> > revert some of the commits. But preserving the commit history is still > >> > useful in case one need to trace the change or bisect for some > >> regression > >> > bugs, etc. > >> > > >> > Just to provide some context: the PR actually contains 700+ commits, > >> and it > >> > dates back to 2015. The development of the Julia binding started in > the > >> > early stage of MXNet. We started with a separate repo due to the > >> > requirement of the package system of julia. > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > Chiyuan > >> > > >> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 3:41 PM Carin Meier <carinme...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > The Import Julia binding PR ,( > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10149), is getting > >> very > >> > > close to being merged. Because of the large number of commits there > >> was a > >> > > suggestion not to use the usual "Squash and Merge". The only option > >> > would > >> > > be "Rebase and Merge" since merging with a merge commit is not > enabled > >> > for > >> > > the project. > >> > > > >> > > *Squash and Merge* - The commits from this branch will be combined > >> into > >> > one > >> > > commit in the base branch (With all the commit messages combined) > >> > > > >> > > *Rebase and Merge* - The commits from this branch will be rebased > and > >> > added > >> > > to the base branch > >> > > > >> > > The PR is over 250+ commits (Github won't show all of them) > >> > > > >> > > Thoughts about how we should handle the merge? > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Carin > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
