With regard to timezone - we have developers in close timezones, so I don't
think this is a reasonable argument.
2016-12-01 16:49 GMT-08:00 Artem Polyakov <artpo...@gmail.com>:
> +1 to Paul.
> I had to go git-bisect OMPI only several times but it always was a
> non-trivial task. PR's are grouping commit's logically and are good for the
> Also you never know what will a "trivial fix" turn into and in what
> IMO all changes needs to go through CI, no exceptions.
> 2016-12-01 16:41 GMT-08:00 Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov>:
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet <gil...@rist.or.jp>
>>> git checkout master
>>> git merge --ff-only topic/misc_fixes
>>> git push origin master
>> You characterized the merge commit has having "close to zero added value"
>> to you - but in this instance it would have saved you and others a
>> non-trivial amount of time in email.
>> Additionally, in projects I work on we value that merge commit as a "cut
>> line" if we ever need to revert an entire PR for some reason. Using
>> git-bisect such that one includes or excludes the entire PR is also a
>> justification for keeping the merge commit. So my opinion is that you
>> should have omitted "--ff-only" and entered a commit message that at least
>> identified the PR number.
>>> though this does not generate a git commit, github.com is smart enough
>>> to figure this out and marks the PR as merged.
>> FWIW: "smart enough" is simply a detection that the last commit in the PR
>> has become an ancestor of the current HEAD.
>> Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
>> Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group
>> Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
>> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
>> devel mailing list
> С Уважением, Поляков Артем Юрьевич
> Best regards, Artem Y. Polyakov
С Уважением, Поляков Артем Юрьевич
Best regards, Artem Y. Polyakov
devel mailing list