On May 26, 2009 08:45:52 Thomas Zander wrote: > On Tuesday 26. May 2009 09.18.43 Chani wrote: > > -I'm not sure if I should rebase when I pull, just in case strange things > > have happened to the git repo. maybe only if the first pull fails? > > The only commits you ever will create in this repo are the translation > update right?
"this repo" being a git kde module (like, say, amarok) - the only commits should be adding translations to .desktop files. > In that case --rebase will not be harmful since it will have no effect if > you don't have any non-pushed commits. > In short; > * if the commits have to go back to svn, rebase is non-optional. ummm... what? there's no svn involved in the git repository. are we on the same page here? > * if you made a change that rebase can't handle but merge would, then > rebase is probably not wanted. so if scripty changes desktop files in amarok, and then someone else changes a desktop file in amarok, git pull might be able to deal with it but git pull -- rebase might not? > > I bet you should just rebase to keep a clean and simple history. except for the above issue. hrm. -- This message brought to you by eevil bananas and the number 3. www.chani3.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
