On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 01:25:44PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Feedback on 3.0 source format problems"):
> > My first worry is that pseudomerges are weird. In fact, I've never
> > seen them outside of weird Debian git workflows :) Someone might
> > look at the interchange view, see all these pseudomerges, and have
> > no idea how to interpret what the Debian maintainer is doing. Do
> > you have any thoughts on mitigating the potential confusion?
>
> I think it might be useful to have an option to git-rev-list to
> disregard non-contributing edges of pseudomerges. That would mean you
> could see the results in `gitk'.That would be really cool. > > The advantage of thinking of the Debian packaging as just another > > branch of development is that the branching structure itself is easy > > to interpret for anyone who uses git. "Ah, I see they merged my > > release tag into their branch, they must have been bringing Debian > > up-to-date with the latest release" -- this is very natural for git > > users. We call it "packaging a new upstream release" but it's > > easier for an outsider to think of it as bringing a feature branch > > up-to-date with the latest mainline developments. > > I can see why you might think this. But this really does depend on > how big the delta is from upstream. Agreed. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
