On Monday, August 08, 2011 06:58:39 PM Michael Jansen wrote: > On Monday, August 08, 2011 05:36:25 PM Marcel Wiesweg wrote: > > > This solution doesn't address the problems Ben mentioned. 100 commits > > > is a lot though so maybe isn't relevant to the OP. > > > > > > I don't think it matters much whether you rename or delete, especially > > > given that "deleting" a branch is really just renaming it (it gets put > > > in some slightly hidden ref). > > > > I will have 5 or 6 commits, so no big problem. In the end, it seems the > > detour of rename and or delete will solve the problem and give identical > > results. > > Not really. It is MUCH easier to handle when you are developing on top of a > branch that has the history rewritten.
I mean renaming is much easier ... > > Mike > > _______________________________________________ > Kde-scm-interest mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest -- Michael Jansen http://michael-jansen.biz _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
