[LLVMdev] git Status

[Matthieu Moy]

Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes:

> On Aug 23, 2011, at 12:35 AM, FlyLanguage wrote:
>>> I'd also recommand "git pull --rebase" if the goal is to keep history
>>> linear. Note that this has to go with a big, fat, warning, telling the
>>> user that rebasing published history is bad. Rebase is a very good tool
>>> to work with private history, but as soon as you've pushed it to some
>>> place visible by other people, you should stop using it.
>> 
>> This is enormously important - once submodule maintainers starts 
>> rebasing, we're screwed.
>
> Why do we care about the development history of a patch?  Patches sent
> to mainline should be simple, small, and obvious.  Any conversion to
> git doesn't change this.

It doesn't change what goes in the upstream repository. It does greatly
improve the tools developers have to manage the private history of their
patches (i.e. changes made between first submission and the second
following reviewers comments for example).

rebase is a great tool to manage your private history, and to avoid
bothering reviewers with your own mistakes (which I think you do care
about). So encouraging people to use rebase and rebase -i on their
private history saves time for reviewers. The warning is important to
avoid people shooting themselves in the foot while trying to save time.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/