Could be better, could be worse, it's workable. So linear history then?
On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 3:58 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich <[email protected]> wrote: > > I guess the one remaining thing that bugs me about the rebase option is > that I think you loose the link with the PR, which you would get in the > merge (or squash) commit otherwise. > > Github PR search actually works with rebased commits. i.e. if you copy the > hash from git log you can then just search PR's with that hash. As an > example, the latest commit hash right now for a PR merged with rebase > is 373e87edaae027acf4869540daa8467007f89aac (which is the git log). You can > then just go to the pull requests tab in github and place that in the > search field and the PR will come up (make sure to remove the is:open > query), i.e. > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/pulls?q=is%3Apr+373e87edaae027acf4869540daa8467007f89aac > . > The github website also tells you what the new commit hash for the rebase > will be on the PR. > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 3:49 PM Jean-Luc Deprez <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > Not sure what the point is? That git requires signatures for > > > authentication (like many decentralized protocols) while svn was based > > > on client-server-based authentication? > > > > > > > Indeed > > > > This was not related to git at all, is it? It is more about some kind > > > of social engineering to get changes accepted (which are hard to > > > counter for projects on the scale of Linux). > > > > > > > Correct. TBH you don't need the size of the Linux kernel to be > susceptible > > to this. > > > > Precise traceability of who wrote which exact portions code isn't of any > > > critical importance in open source projects, authorship is. You have > > > ... > > > whole point of the CLA/Apache Foundation, one of its main goals is to > > > actually to protect individuals. > > > > > > > I guess that's what I aimed to say with "enterprise thinking". > > > > If commit signing is deemed irrelevant, the importance of merge commits > > drops indeed. > > > > Which reduces the "discussion" to, should merge commits still be allowed > in > > certain cases or should that always be a rebase no matter the size of the > > incoming work? (aka. linear history) > > > > I guess the one remaining thing that bugs me about the rebase option is > > that I think you loose the link with the PR, which you would get in the > > merge (or squash) commit otherwise. > > > > > -- > > Matthew de Detrich > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > *m:* +491603708037 > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* [email protected] >
