From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Robert Klein <roklein@roklein.de>
Subject: Re: Merge branch 'maint'
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:05:37 +0200
Message-ID: <20150910170537.26662d40@pckr150.mpip-mainz.mpg.de>
References: <87twr37il4.fsf@gmail.com> <87y4gfpkjy.fsf@kyleam.com>
	<87lhceo8he.fsf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40505)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <roklein@roklein.de>) id 1Za3Q3-0003Kc-QM
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:05:48 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <roklein@roklein.de>) id 1Za3Py-0002CZ-Gt
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:05:47 -0400
Received: from gate1.mpip-mainz.mpg.de ([194.95.63.248]:32658)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <roklein@roklein.de>) id 1Za3Py-00029w-7l
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:05:42 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87lhceo8he.fsf@gmail.com>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Oleh Krehel <ohwoeowho@gmail.com>
Cc: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hi,

Oleh Krehel <ohwoeowho@gmail.com> wrote:

> Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com> writes:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > Oleh Krehel <ohwoeowho@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Was the issue of abundant "Merge branch 'maint'" commit messages
> >> discussed before? I couldn't find a reference...
> >>
> >> It's not a big deal, really, but I personally prefer to have linear
> >> history with commits that actually do stuff. And it should be easy
> >> to switch to this style: just use the "rebase" instead of the
> >> "merge" command.
> >>
> >> Anyway, it's a small thing, and if Nicolas or Bastien strongly
> >> like the merge method I won't bring it up again. But if they don't
> >> care either way, I think it's better to start rebasing.
> >
> > While I'm all for rebasing unpushed commits, short-lived feature
> > branches, and throw-away integration branches, your suggestion would
> > frequently rewrite the history of a long-lived public branch.
> 
> Why not just cherry-pick the commits from master onto maint, or the
> other way around? That would result in no merge commits.
> 
> I think it should be possible to rebase two branches without having to
> rewrite the public history. As far as I understood, maint is a subset
> of master, i.e. all commits that are in maint are in master as well.
> Is that correct?

No.

I agree, the many merge commits in August/September look ugly right
after the 8.3/8.3.1 release. Maint and master will surely diverge more,
now...

Best regards
Robert