On 05/14/2014 10:50 AM, Chris Radek wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:04:32PM -0400, Robert Ellenberg wrote: > >> Does anyone object to merging into master now? > > I've done a pretty-easy rebase that linearizes the branch and puts > it atop master, and I was able to remove a few false starts like the > pair: > > Temporary revert from master to see if refactor is the case > Revert "Temporary revert from master to see if refactor is the case" > > and I still end up with the same (well-tested) result as the > merge-into-master gives, in the end. These aren't a big deal but if > we end up bisecting for bug-hunting reasons in the future, it'd be > nice to not have them pop up. I only paid attention to commits that > were later reverted -- the low-hanging fruit. > > Should I push this as circular-blend-arc-rc4 so you can have a look > at it? Does anyone have strong feelings about merge as-is vs. > a linear fast-forward?
I prefer a linear history with the false starts removed. Rob, what are your thoughts on this? -- Sebastian Kuzminsky ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
