Hi Mike,
Sure, it can be discussed.
So, I think that what I write after you has to be written after what you
write and my own experience with no-linear commit history tells me it
shouldn't be done, it becomes quickly messy.
Thanks,
-Fred
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Michael A. Labriola
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 4:45 PM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: RE: [Git/Wiki] please review the proposed workflow and comment
I re-organized a bit to make it visually clearer but still, I guess it can
be better and the text better written than with my words, I'm opened to see
your suggestions.
Okay, so, here is where we disagree. I do not think what you labeled as
"Bad" is bad. It's not bad to me, it's an accurate depiction of what
happened in git. The rebase on the other hand is rewriting history to make
it seem linear when it *was not*.
So, before saying we _want_ a linear history, let's discuss why.
Mike
