On Dec 16, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Scott Robison <sc...@casaderobison.com> wrote: > > couldn't 99% of rebase use cases be handled with private branches?
Probably not with the current design. For one thing, there are no “branches”, only “branch.” That is, the private branch is always called “private”, so that when you commit to it, return to trunk, and create a new private branch, you’re actually forking the original private branch. In order to have Git-like private branches, I think the design would have to change to allow multiple independent private branches. Not that I’m asking for such a thing. I already made public my opinions about working in private. (“Guy in the room” syndrome.) > I can do whatever I want in the private branch, merge from trunk, cherry > pick, reverse out, whatever to make the tip of my private branch 100% > pristine and proper, and only then merge it to trunk. That’s pretty much the definition of “guy in the room.” Why are we re-learning this lesson 44 years after its dangers were first published? _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
