On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 10:15 AM Boudewijn Rempt <b...@valdyas.org> wrote: > > On Friday, 2 October 2020 19:39:37 CEST Nate Graham wrote: > > > Thoughts? > > Like others have said, please, no. Squashed commits are the worst things to > have in a git history. They make it hard to use git blame, they make it hard > to read the history... And the whole argument about making life easier for > drive-by contributors and newbies and people not familiar with git isn't to > the point anyway: those people will make a fork, do their work, make a merge > request, get that reviewed, and then the maintainer does the merge. >
This last bit is worth emphasising strongly. The whole thing is only at issue because in KDE we assume every developer can land their changes anywhere and rely on an honour system to enforce that it is properly reviewed (with the exception of sysadmin stuff). But many drive-by contributors and newbies or even seasoned contributors won't be deterred at all from not having commit access to the main repo. Additionally I suspect not many people will object to a maintainer taking their changes but landing them in different commits or a slightly different form either. Regards, - Johan Ouwerkerk
