Martin Sandve Alnæs <[email protected]> writes: > Should I squash martinal/topic-foo again before merging into master? > Pro: clean history in master, this lasts forever. > Con: git log master..next will show the pre-squashed commits, until we > reset next again.
IMO, you should not modify patches after making them public (usually be merging to 'next'). Having multiple versions of a patch makes it more difficult to find in the history, to fix in the correct place, and to merge into other branches that may conflict. It's about the near- and mid-term social dynamics, not burdening reviewers with seeing the same patches multiple times, not invalidating earlier test results, etc. Permanent history doesn't have to give the impression that we are always perfect. The workflow should be ensuring that features are complete and bug-free by the time they graduate to 'master', and otherwise optimizing for reviewability and testability/debugging when something turns up in 'next'.
pgpm9O8iW5CAO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
