Re: git-subtree Ready #2

2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: git-subtree Ready #2

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:53:08

Avery Pennarun [off-list ref] writes:
Overall I agree that there's little benefit in preserving the history,
at least as far as I can see, *except* that some code changes were
submitted by people other than me and squashing those changes might
conceivably cause licensing confusion down the road.
That is a good point, and it sounds like a good enough justification to
merge with history, at least for me.

Re: git-subtree Ready #2

From: Avery Pennarun <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:53:08

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Avery Pennarun [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Overall I agree that there's little benefit in preserving the history,
at least as far as I can see, *except* that some code changes were
submitted by people other than me and squashing those changes might
conceivably cause licensing confusion down the road.
That is a good point, and it sounds like a good enough justification to
merge with history, at least for me.
Should we filter-branch or rebase the history first, or just leave it as is?

Like I said, since I don't expect there to be any more back-and-forth
development, rebasing should be pretty harmless.

Avery
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help