Hi,

On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 22:46, Matthias Bläsing <[email protected]> wrote:
> I suggest to disable the squash-and-merge und rebase-and-merge buttons:

I'm -0 to -1 on this change.  It has the potential to increase the
headache for contributions, committers and release managers.  Is it
really necessary?

What exactly are the problems and concerns here?  I understand the
immediate issue, and GitHub behaviour isn't ideal (it looks like
they're actually working on improvements to it).  But what exactly are
the ramifications for us?

After the discussion on the test PR, I tried to find if this issue had
been raised elsewhere around ASF.  I didn't find anything specific,
but did find quite a few infra issues from projects requesting that
Squash and Merge be their *only* option.  How are they handling it?
Why do they feel it works for them when we don't feel it works for us?

If tracing authorship of contributions is the only concern, there is
also the fact that the commit is not the only (or canonical) record of
this - there is the pull request and associated email trail that is
archived by ASF for this reason.  Does this provide all the additional
information required?

Are there other ways of handling this?  eg. git mail mapping?

Does manual squashing and merging still fall foul of the problem with
PRs not being marked as merged, so missing that part of the audit
trail too?

Best wishes,

Neil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists



Reply via email to