On Thu, 23 May 2013 09:01:15 +0000, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Instead of having a nice "these six commits marked as 'x' were done
> on a branch forked some time ago, to address only this one issue and
> to address it fully" history that explains how these commits were
> related and these commits are the full solution to a single issue:
>       x---x---x---x---x---x
>      /                     \
>  ---o---o---o---o---o---o---M---o---o---...
> they end up with something like this, even with the "flip the heads
> of a merge" option, by pulling too often:
>       x---x   x---x---x   x
>      /     \ /         \ / \
>  ---o---o---M---o---o---M---M---o---o---...

Wouldn't that be (you don't want to put your work back into master before
it's done) the following?

      /       /           /    \

With a bit of luck the first-parent strands will also run like this.

I know that rebasing topic branches is better than updating, but my
monetary upstream is busy letting go a clearcase-minted mindset.
Teaching them rebasing will take a while, and as long as tthat we
will have the picture above.


"Totally trivial. Famous last words."
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to