[openstack-dev] [git-review] Supporting development in local branches

Yuriy Taraday yorik.sar at gmail.com
Thu Aug 7 22:40:12 UTC 2014

On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Chris Friesen <chris.friesen at windriver.com>

> On 08/06/2014 05:41 PM, Zane Bitter wrote:
>> On 06/08/14 18:12, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
>>> Well, as per Git author, that's how you should do with not-CVS. You have
>>> cheap merges - use them instead of erasing parts of history.
>> This is just not true.
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg39091.html
>> Choice quotes from the author of Git:
>> * 'People can (and probably should) rebase their _private_ trees'
>> * 'you can go wild on the "git rebase" thing'
>> * 'we use "git rebase" etc while we work on our problems.'
>> * '"git rebase" is not wrong.'
> Also relevant:
> "...you must never pull into a branch that isn't already
> in good shape."
> "Don't merge upstream code at random points."
> "keep your own history clean"

And in the very same thread he says "I don't like how you always rebased
patches" and "none of these rules should be absolutely black-and-white".
But let's not get driven into discussion of what Linus said (or I'll have
to rewatch his ages old talk in Google to get proper quotes).
In no way I want to promote exposing private trees with all those
intermediate changes. And my proposal is not against rebasing (although we
could use -R option for git-review more often to publish what we've tested
and to let reviewers see diffs between patchsets). It is for letting people
keep history of their work towards giving you a crystal-clean change
request series.


Kind regards, Yuriy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140808/86c4c798/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list