Two hours ago, John Clements wrote:
> Taking a step back: is there really anything wrong with such
> commits?

What Robby and Vincent generalizes too -- merging can be confusing
sometimes, either to the author or to the others; and there are a
bunch of tools that become less useful if the history line is
cluttered with merges (for example, the log graphs become much less
useful).  OTOH, doing a rebase means that for most users you end up
doing the same amount of work (a conflict to resolve will happen
either way).

You could argue that these tools are the blame -- they could just
ignore these merges -- but there is no proper way to know when a merge
commit was really trivial (the notifications script is guessing when
it is, and I had a question on this on the git list, bottom line is
that you can't tell without replaying the whole thing).  Bisecting is
even more problematic, since it really wants a flat line to work on.

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                             Maze is Life!
  For list-related administrative tasks:

Reply via email to