On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The essential idea being to minimise the amount of congnitive effort a
> human has when trying to explore the history and understand what
> "actually happened" from a master perspective.
> "Long histories that go for days only to merge one commit" tend to
> harm this, and I think that's the essential irritation.

This makes sense to me.

Personally, I think rebases are easy in the vast majority of the cases
(specificially for our gentoo tree, where actual conflicts are often
unlikely). However, for long-running branches (either in time, which I
think doesn't happen that often, or in work), making an explicit merge
could still make sense.

(I guess this is slightly different than somehow limiting the length
of the left-sized twig.)



Reply via email to