From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Branches are Scary Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 18:10:05 +0200 Message-ID: <83mvt7wxeq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bn9oydgw.fsf@russet.org.uk> <874mfgn3t7.fsf@acer.localhost.com> <8737v0yay1.fsf@russet.org.uk> <83fuz0xlk9.fsf@gnu.org> <838u4sxh2e.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1u3pxjz.fsf@fastmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1450455008 31466 80.91.229.3 (18 Dec 2015 16:10:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:10:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Random832 Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 18 17:10:03 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a9xbT-0007Az-6J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:09:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33261 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a9xbN-00017b-F8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:09:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46956) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a9xbF-00015J-Eb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:09:46 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a9xbC-0002he-2x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:09:45 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42973) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a9xbB-0002ha-Vk; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:09:42 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1957 helo=HOME-C4E4A596F7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1a9xbB-0006gb-CB; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:09:41 -0500 In-reply-to: <87d1u3pxjz.fsf@fastmail.com> (message from Random832 on Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:48:48 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:196472 Archived-At: > From: Random832 > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:48:48 -0500 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > So I think the too detailed history is not important for these > > branches, since they eventually are going to be deleted. Therefore, > > my advice is just not to squash there. > > If they get merged, the branch may be deleted but the history > stays forever, as part of the history graph of the branch it is > merged into. I see no problem with that, FWIW. > I suppose you could squash (and rebase, so the parent branch can be > fast-forwarded) before merging, so that the merge reflects the > squashed history rather than the real history that existed on the > branch (and then never push the squashed version to the feature > branch). Is that what you meant? That's one possibility, yes. Another produce diffs from the branch and apply them to master (since you don't want the history, why do it via Git?). And I'm sure there's more.