On Jun 20, 2016, at 9:25 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> wrote: > > On 6/20/16 8:35 PM, Lars Bergstrom wrote: >> Backouts came up in the discussion, and I tried to make it pretty clear that >> they are not compatible with a GitHub-style development model (even if you >> *could* hypothetically do crazy things like force-pushing rewritten >> histories to master). > > Wait, why are rewritten histories relevant? A backout doesn't involve > rewriting history...
If a backout lands as a `git revert` of the offending commit(s) I'm certainly less concerned, as that's annoying but not impossible for people to continue rebasing against. The way it was explained to me (and I may have been misunderstanding!) is that if a batch of changes land on m-i but then fail tests, they are removed and there is the mercurial equivalent of a force-push back to m-i without those changes in the history. That workflow made me concerned for people with an open PR, as if the PR was based on master at commit A, commit B lands and they rebase against it, but then B disappears from the history, getting their PR landable again is likely going to require intervention by a git expert. - Lars _______________________________________________ dev-servo mailing list dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-servo
