That's generally my approach too. Squash and merge unless you need a record of separate authorship.
Squashing helps managing cherrypicking for releases, and ensuring what's new has decent coverage. On 29 September 2016 at 00:02, Andreas Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey. > > This is a continuation of the discussion we had on squashing in June: > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-learn/2016-June/000121.html > > I thought we discussed this again after the "squash and merge" feature was > introduced, but I couldn't find the thread. > > I think Joel, me and some others where recently using the github "squash > and merge" feature, > which I think is great. It removes burden from the contributors and makes > for a "clean" (or fake) history. > I like it because it makes cherry-picking easy and allows a pretty simple > analysis of what's happening. > > When doing some backports, I realized that some people (including Gael) > didn't use it. > > Is there a reason not to use squash and merge? Should we make it policy? > > The one case where I think we might not want it is in case there are > multiple authors in a PR. > Other than that, I don't really see a downside. > > Wdyt? > > Andy > _______________________________________________ > scikit-learn mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn >
_______________________________________________ scikit-learn mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
