Am 14.07.2015 um 16:39 schrieb Jason Moore:
It wasn't ignored, I just don't see it. All I see are detailed agreements
or counters to each point that has been mentioned to be negative about
rebasing.
Indeed, I misrepresented that a bit.
I can't hope to discuss solution details if we don't even agree on the
analysis. Even less if the solution isn't 100% complete yet.
Here is my two sentence solution:
Rebasing has enough substantial negative effects on contributions that we'd
like to avoid encouraging it and using it in SymPy development. The few
benefits that rebasing offers are not worth the cost of the loss
contributions.
Can you write a two sentence solution to solving the loss of contributions
due to git kung fu issues? I'm happy to read it if so.
1) I think the negative effects can be nullified by giving people a
tried-and-true, undoable git workflow ("I think" is what I meant with
"incomplete" above).
2) Rebasing is the only way to clean up a PR that has undergone several
rounds of review.
My two-sentence position on the current official policy:
A) Rebasing is indeed a more advanced use of git, so it should never be
requested, and recommended only with a reference to the explanation of
the workflow.
B) The current official policy is too strict, the justifications are
either bogus or can be avoided.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/55A52B99.70000%40durchholz.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
