Hi, > Incidentally, this is why is most larger open source projects... see linux > (or even what we did on FlexUnit in git) have a very few number of people who > knew git well that managed the actual develop and master branches. Could that work for us? (With committers pushing to develop that is?) Could someone who a git expert "clean up" the log on develop from time to time as required? Would anyone want to do that?
> It doesn't replace a nail but for certain applications it's much more useful. > Look at the success of open source projects on github, linux and many others > and I promise, we aren't all crazy. I don't think that the issue. Most of us know some git and get what the benefits are (local branches, offline commits etc etc). I used git successfully on other projects and on my own projects and it was not this complex and there were minimal issues. > I personally wish we had more of a github fork model here where a couple of > people have the keys to the castle. Which is probably against the Apache Way. > [1] > http://www.jarrodspillers.com/2009/08/19/git-merge-vs-git-rebase-avoiding-rebase-hell/ And this is the problem I run into again and agin when reading about git. if you read the conclusion to me it's saying you need to be really really careful using rebase. It seems to me having a slightly messy log is the lesser evil. Thanks, Justin
