Does somebody else use the git workflow we do as of now in Apache universe? Are not we quite unique? While I do share the same opinion Mick has in his last response, I also see the disadvantage in having the commit history polluted by merges. I am genuinely curious if there is any other Apache project out there doing things same we do (or did in the past) and who changed that in one way or the other, plus reasons behind it.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 at 19:27, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Merge commits aren’t that useful > > > > > I keep coming back to this. Arguably the only benefit they offer now is > > procedurally forcing us to not miss a bugfix on a branch, but given how > > much we amend many things presently anyway that dilutes that benefit. > > > > > Doesn't this come down to how you read git history, and for example > appreciating a change-centric view over branch isolated development? > I like a change originating from just one commit, and having tracking > visible across the branches. This gives you immediate information about > where and how the change was applied without having to go to the jira > ticket (and relying on it being accurate). Connecting commits on different > branches that are developed separately (no merge tracking) is more > complicated. So yeah, I see value in those merge commits. I'm not against > trying something new, just would appreciate a bit more exposure to it > before making a project wide change. Hence, let's not rush it and just > start first with trunk. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
