Yup. I am a little annoyed at myself about that.. Thanks for the reminder though.
Mark > On Nov 5, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Owen Nichols <onich...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > +1 > > When merging a PR from GitHub, if the green button does not already say > “Squash and merge”, click the little triangle and select “Squash and merge”. > > In addition to all the reasons already listed in this thread, it make reverts > a lot cleaner too. > >> On Oct 28, 2019, at 12:47 PM, Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> >>> On Oct 22, 2019, at 5:12 PM, Nabarun Nag <n...@pivotal.io> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Geode Committers, >>> >>> A kind request for using squash commit instead of using merge. >>> This will really help us in our bisect operations when a >>> regression/flakiness in the product is introduced. We can automate and go >>> through fewer commits faster, avoiding commits like "spotless fix" and >>> "re-trigger precheck-in" or other minor commits in the merged branch. >>> >>> Also, please use the commit format : (helps us to know who worked on it, >>> what is the history) >>> GEODE-xxxx: <brief intro > >>> >>> * explanation line 1 >>> * explanation line 2 >>> >>> This is not a rule or anything, but a request to help out your fellow >>> committers in quickly detecting a problem. >>> >>> For inspiration, we can look into Apache Kafka / Spark where they have a >>> complete linear graph for their main branch HEAD [see attachment] >>> >>> Regards >>> Naba. >>> >>> >> >
