Date: 2016-05-20 12:43 pm (UTC)
jack: (Default)
From: [personal profile] jack
That's about what I thought, although I've not worked on any projects large enough I've first-hand experience of which is better in practice.

In fact, I've commented elsewhere the history model may not be quite complete, a more helpful model might be that when viewing the history, by default, you view features like that as if they were squashed. But that history is preserved and you can choose to see it.

That also gives options like, if the history is a mess, you can still *allow* people to see it, if that's more useful than just a single "new feature" commit, but not pollute the upstream branch with "oops, doesn't compile, undo" commits. Or any other reason people may want to see the "actual history" rather than the "cleaned up logical-commit history".
Identity URL: 
Account name:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.


If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at

Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.


Matthew Garrett

About Matthew

Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Google. Ex-biologist. @mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer.

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags