On 30 December 2012 14:00, Nico Williams <n...@cryptonector.com> wrote:
> > And why do they do this? I kinda/sorta get the mechanism. I just don't > see > > the motivation. (And "upstream maintainers insist upon this" is not > > motivation, it's just moving the question of motivation around.) > > Because they want clean history. This is precisely why I maintain that you're not going to see a "rebase" in Fossil. Quoting from http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg01792.html: *There are differing philosophies here. Some say it is important to present a clean, linear narrative of what took place - a narrative that is easy to follow and easy to understand. Others say that it is more important to present history as it actually occurred, in all its messy detail, not how you wish it had occurred. Git and Hg tend more toward the first view whereas Fossil leans toward the second.* That's the "Voice of God" for Fossil speaking there. What you want is exactly not what Fossil was built to provide. -- "Perhaps people don't believe this, but throughout all of the discussions of entering China our focus has really been what's best for the Chinese people. It's not been about our revenue or profit or whatnot." --Sergey Brin, demonstrating the emptiness of the "don't be evil" mantra.
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
