Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...]
> This single "feature" [rebase] of git has produced huge (and heated) > controversy on the debian-devel (and probably other) mailing > list. It seems everyone has a different idea of when re-basing is > required, and when it should or should not be used. Indeed. And not having the feature is an obvious way of avoiding the controversy. On the other hand, there's one case where it's obviously OK for me to rewrite history: when they're mine and have never left my control. With CVS, that might be something I'd do in a checkout using quilt. So I'm storing changes for convenience, and when I've got something I want to commit, I can do so. I might do the same with monotone, or (I guess) I could use kill_rev_locally (though possibly that's more awkward than using quilt). git provides suitable tools so I can just use git for the whole thing (though there are also quilt-like addons to git). But sure, it's strictly unnecessary; one could always use merge, just as you're forced to do with monotone. It just feels generally cleaner (IMHO) to "merge" the couple of changes I have locally to the new upstream version by rebasing them (basically applying the patches to the new head) rather than really merging. Mostly doing that keeps the history more linear, and (perhaps) easier to understand. [...] _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
