Git-using core devs: preference for merge vs. rebase?
Do the Git-using core developers have a preference for merge vs. rebase for updating an upstream-tracking branch? I prefer to rebase to keep the changes in question at the branch HEAD, especially if the branch hasn't been pushed publicly yet, but a rebase for something that *has* been pushed means a forced overwrite is necessary, which may trip up anyone who has already added the branch as a remote and isn't expecting it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Git-using core devs: preference for merge vs. rebase?
On Nov 3, 5:58 am, "Tom X. Tobin" wrote: > Do the Git-using core developers have a preference for merge vs. > rebase for updating an upstream-tracking branch? I prefer to rebase > to keep the changes in question at the branch HEAD, especially if the > branch hasn't been pushed publicly yet, but a rebase for something > that *has* been pushed means a forced overwrite is necessary, which > may trip up anyone who has already added the branch as a remote and > isn't expecting it. For my ticket branches, I rebase. If I ever have a big feature branch, I'll probably merge. Unless it's a major feature branch, I'm not sure that'll be a huge issue. I also don't bother frequently updating against lastest upstream until I'm at some stable point where I'm happy, or I know that some features have changed. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Git-using core devs: preference for merge vs. rebase?
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Tom X. Tobin wrote: > Do the Git-using core developers have a preference for merge vs. > rebase for updating an upstream-tracking branch? I prefer to rebase > to keep the changes in question at the branch HEAD, especially if the > branch hasn't been pushed publicly yet, but a rebase for something > that *has* been pushed means a forced overwrite is necessary, which > may trip up anyone who has already added the branch as a remote and > isn't expecting it. First off, I'll preface my comments by saying that I'm a hg user by habit, so I know the internals there a lot better, and my work practices reflect that preference. I would say that merges would be preferred -- but that's got more to do with forced overwrites being annoying to deal with as a general principle, rather than any specific issue with integrating with core. With my core dev hat on, if I'm contemplating a contributed branch for merge, I usually reviewing code using the github branch comparison view; when I apply it, I use merge --nocommit --collapse. From a 'contribution to core' perspective, it doesn't really matter whether you've rebased or merged upstream changes, both will collapse the same. The only way I can see this being a functional problem for core is if I've historically pulled your repo to merge a different feature branch, and I now revisit your repo to merge a second feature than has been in development longer than the first, has been rebased, and therefore requires a forced overwrite. In that case, merging would have caused less trouble. Beyond that, it's only an issue for anyone that is tracking your repo specifically because of the new feature. Back when I was experimenting with git, I used to rebase regularly; but then I got a few complaints from people following my branches about what a pain that practice was. I stopped, started using merge, and didn't really notice any significant practical change. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
Re: Git-using core devs: preference for merge vs. rebase?
Hi Tom, On Nov 2, 12:58 pm, "Tom X. Tobin" wrote: > Do the Git-using core developers have a preference for merge vs. > rebase for updating an upstream-tracking branch? I prefer to rebase > to keep the changes in question at the branch HEAD, especially if the > branch hasn't been pushed publicly yet, but a rebase for something > that *has* been pushed means a forced overwrite is necessary, which > may trip up anyone who has already added the branch as a remote and > isn't expecting it. I understand the appeal of keeping the changes nice and linear at the head, but in practice I find merging pretty easy to deal with. With github compare view (and command-line equivalents "git diff master...branchname" and "git log master...branchname") it's still quite easy to tease out the actual changes in the branch for review. Merging also keeps commit messages accurate for long-running feature branches, and avoids the forcing hassles for anyone trying to track your branch. For something you haven't pushed in public yet, of course rebasing is fine. Carl -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
