I haven't progressed those ideas yet with the main list. I'm just in the
process of updating my kit, plus a few familiy issue, which meant I've been
short on time.
I wanted to do some research on whether commit-tree would take the 0
hash as being a valid parent (as a stand in for root) or
So what sort of discussion came out of this on the main git development list?
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Interesting blog, but I don't think it's really that workable with respect
> to having every commit within the rebase being merge linked back to the
> older
Interesting blog, but I don't think it's really that workable with respect
to having every commit within the rebase being merge linked back to the
older version.
However I do think that support is needed for marking a previous release
commit (probably also version tagged) as being a terminus
Michael,
I don't believe so, but it is probably worth re-raising on the Git mailing
list. (Michael Haggerty is currently active as well)
I say that because @dscho is currently doing a better rebase that can handle
merges and amend the flow logic within such merged series that are being
rebased.
A few years ago (2009), the idea was put forward that some parents in a merge
should be marked as "historical", or "uninteresting", and not displayed by
default
(http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/2009/08/rebase-with-history-implementation.html)
Does git currently have any support for this?
