On 22/10/14 12:29, Dan Berindei wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Galder Zamarreño <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Guys, Jason from Wildfly provided some interesting information a > while back on the benefits of “merge” approach vs cherry-pick. To > paraphrase: > > > 1. The original history from the author is preserved > > > TBH most of the time I don't care about my history, I always have > stupid commit messages until I squash my commits and "prettify" the > commit messages. Indeed: I commit and squash all the time. I'm only interested in seeing multiple commits in the following case:
- they are actually subtasks of the main PR - if the pull request is for a feature which was developed collaboratively by multiple developers > > 2. The author does not have to toss their branch to avoid a > conflict introduced by a pull after their PR is merged > > > I think this can only happen if the branch had conflicts and the > committer resolved them, but we require authors to rebase so I don't > think this has been a problem for us. So the best approach seems to actually be rebase/pull, which gets us what we want. Tristan _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
