Am 05.03.2012 00:13, schrieb Matthew Brush:
On 12-03-04 01:29 PM, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 13:01:27 -0800
Matthew Brush<mbr...@codebrainz.ca>  wrote:

On 12-03-04 07:07 AM, Colomban Wendling wrote:
Le 04/03/2012 09:28, Frank Lanitz a écrit :
On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 03:40:29 +0100
Colomban Wendling<lists....@herbesfolles.org>   wrote:

IMO we should not record merges when there is only one single
commit or when the commits are unrelated (though the latter
should probably be less common) and rather rebase or cherry-pick
the commits.

However, we must keep the merge when the commits are a whole
thing not to lose that information (when several commits are
needed to implement a single thing).

I agree. And in second case we have to keep care that merge
message is informative enough to don't go into complete tree just
to understand what have been done there. Personally I started
using the git merge command from command line more often instead
of github's web interface as its not satisfying my understanding.

Same for me, moreover because I prefer to test the PR locally as a
simple branch before doing the merge, so it's not much effort than
using the GitHub UI, and it's a lot more powerful.


Same here, but I don't think it matters whether using `git merge` or
the Github GUI to do it, there's still a need to change the default
merge message (apparently).

Issue on github is, that you aren't able to change the first line ...


... Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It keeps them standard and the default first line contains useful information like that it was a merge, the PR #, the person who made the PR and their branch name.

In any case, I'm fine with doing it however everyone wants. I use gitk to view the history usually, so it's pretty obvious what all has happened.


IMO "merge X from Y" is perfectly fine. The commit is just that, a merge commit. It isn't necessary to contain more information, since the merged commits are there as well. They are not lost and they still describe what they change. And the merge itself commit doesn't actually contain code changes so it might even be wrong to add a story to it (although describing the rationale of the merge is also good).

If merge commits are annoying they can be hidden from the log as I mentioned before.

Best regards.
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
Geany-devel@uvena.de
https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel

Reply via email to