On 01/07/2009 01:19 PM, James Turner wrote: > On 7 Jan 2009, at 19:05, Tim Moore wrote: > >> I like to fetch and then rebase my local work without merging; it >> makes >> it much easier to get the commits into CVS via git-cvsexportcommit. >> When we move >> to git and publish (sometimes) personal branches, I'll probably >> switch back to >> "git-pull". > > Ah, that's interesting. I tried git-cvsexportcommit for the first time > yesterday, and it worked okay (with me git-pulling to the local master > and then rebasing my topic branches to it). But it makes sense (now) > that I can fetch and rebase with no merging.
That's all fine and true when spoken from one committer to another. But for everybody else, the "merge" function exists for a reason. Suppose a committer gets two patches, one from Wilbur and one from Orville, and applies them both to the same file. They don't conflict, so all is well, and the committer can rebase without merging. However ... Wilbur will have to do a merge, and Orville will have to do a merge. This should be smooth and easy, since the patches don't conflict, but it is still a merge. The merge function exists for a reason. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It is the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Xq1LFB _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
