Le 29/12/2019 à 14:31, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 12:46:50PM +0100, Julien '_FrnchFrgg_' RIVAUD wrote:
At worst, no commit is testable in the
branch except the last, and git will say that the bug was introduced in
the branch, which is not worse that what you'd get without a merge commit.
We normally require every commit to be tested, so it is a lot worse, yes.
That's very good, and should not change. I test every commit of every
merge request I submit, even on projects that use real merges. It is
easy to create CI/CD configurations and/or hooks that enforce that when
trying to push a patch set, with or without a merge commit.
Merge commits have the great effect of separating the history into
related chunks. Without them, you don't really know if a single bugfix
is logically part of a set (because it fixes something important to pave
the way) or not, and you have to think harder to detect the end of a set
and the start of another (with maybe single commits inbetween).
Segher
