>>> "DK" == David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > Uwe Brauer <o...@mat.ucm.es> writes: >>> Pushed. Oops, sorry, I overlooked that new commits had come in. A non >>> fast-forward merge commit was produced on savannah. Not good... >> >> Actually I find non fast-forward merges much easier to understand than >> fast-forward one. ;-)
> That's nonsensical since any non fast-forward commit consists of the > combination of fast-forwarding (direct) commits with a subsequent merge > commit of two branches with diverging history. Rebased commits, in > contrast, are just what would have resulted from linear development. I know and that is why I don't like rebasing. > It may be easier on the developer, but certainly not on the reader. That might be so, but I think it is just a different philosophy. I'd prefer to know where a commit comes from (I mean from which branch), and that is why I find linearising (that is rebasing) confusing to say the least. But I think it boils down to a question of personal taste. (And I admit that if there are to many no fast forward merges from many branches that might be confusing as well). Anyhow.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
