Hi, On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:56:19AM -0700, Sterling Smith wrote: > Being a co-maintainer of a software project hosted on GitHub, where > the main developer does not use branches leads to inconsistencies in > how his contributions are handled vs other developers.
What would those inconsistencies be? What is the difference between the master branch in a fork and an arbitrarily named branch based off master in a fork? Can't both be rebased against upstream/master in exactly the same way? > I highly recommend that Clemens move to putting logically separate > changes in separate topical branches, and avoid developing on master, > except very tiny changes, e.g. typos in docs. My point was (as explained in the parallel mail) that I seldom have multiple logically separate changes at the same time, and just make my fork's master branch my topic branch for the duration of the pull request. > There should also be a decision on the recommended way to get updates > from the latest master, whether that is by merging or rebasing. I > personally like rebasing, but there is a stigma associated with it. > Note the possibility of a safer forced push after a rebase with > --force-with-lease. (I didn't look to see if there was already a > recommendation.) See https://trac.macports.org/wiki/WorkingWithGit#updating. The text currently recommends a rebase. What's the stigma? The need to force push to your fork? -- Clemens _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
