|
|
|
|
|
|
by mikekchar
3589 days ago
|
|
|
It's just a way of looking at it. Let's say I'm in charge of a project. You send me a patch. I commit the patch. What I want in my history is that I committed your patch. I really don't care what you did in your history to create that patch. But it's equally valid to consider all your commits important in my history as well. It just depends on what you want. Personally, I never rebase, but I can understand why some people like that feature. |
|
|
Many devs are happy with what you send them... as long if the history is right!
And right seems totally random to me.
Most are happy if you simply send them "one commit", but tell you to merge multiple commits before they accept it.
Others say "lets split this or that" before they accept it.
Then I have to go back and fiddle around with Git just to get my change landed...