On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Matthew Brett <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > >>> Now might be a good time to discuss how we'd like the history to look >>> in a year from now. If we follow the above approach, I guess we may >>> end up with one merge message for each small little bug-fix? (Unless >>> --rebase is used) How do we ensure that "fast-forward" merges occur >>> whenever possible? >> >> The only solution that I know of is to have a pull-like workflow, but >> I thought this was rejected as too complicated ? > > Am I the only person to find it strange that we have an active and > skilled development community, many of whom have been using git > routinely for a long time, and we none of us seem to know what the > agreed workflow is
I think nobody knows because no such thing exists (that is there is no agreed workflow). FWIW, I think Stefan's suggestion is good, cheers, David _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
