From: Andrew Ardill <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Jakub Narebski <email@example.com> Cc: Junio C Hamano <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Ed Hutchins <email@example.com>, Antoine Pelisse <firstname.lastname@example.org>, git <email@example.com> Subject: Re: Feature request: "author branch" in commit object Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 10:00:48 +1000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAH5451kq-zmy1kFFqx44ba4iM+H4zCF2J3GMc2ppcmoz5=urXA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On 4 July 2013 09:46, Jakub Narebski <email@example.com> wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster <at> pobox.com> writes: >> It is not just misleading but is actively wrong to recording the >> name of the original branch in commits and carrying them forward via >> rebase. If you want a record of what a group of commits were about, >> the right time to do so is when you merge. > > There is even git-resurrect.sh script in 'contrib/' that makes > use of that practice to find merged-in and deleted branches, > and resurrect them (among other tools). How do users who wish to keep a record of branch names find out that --no-ff will enable this behaviour? Is this a common enough requirement to make --no-ff the default behaviour (probably not, and that transition would be painful)? What are the shortcomings of using --no-ff in the analogue to how mercurials named branches work? I think the git-flow and git-list style workflows have done a lot to promote a set of usage patterns that keep this metadata around, I just wonder if we can do more to assist users in what seems to be a relatively common request. Regards, Andrew Ardill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-04 0:01 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-07-02 19:37 Ed Hutchins 2013-07-02 19:49 ` Fredrik Gustafsson 2013-07-02 20:00 ` Junio C Hamano 2013-07-02 20:34 ` Ed Hutchins 2013-07-03 16:16 ` Antoine Pelisse 2013-07-03 17:31 ` Ed Hutchins 2013-07-03 18:19 ` Junio C Hamano 2013-07-04 0:00 ` Andrew Ardill [this message] 2013-07-02 20:31 ` Johan Herland 2013-07-03 9:33 ` Matthieu Moy 2013-07-03 15:47 ` Ed Hutchins 2013-07-03 18:08 ` Junio C Hamano 2013-07-03 23:46 ` Feature request: Jakub Narebski 2013-07-03 23:52 ` Dany 2013-07-03 23:53 ` Dany 2013-07-04 8:08 ` Matthieu Moy 2013-07-09 21:46 ` Feature request: "author branch" in commit object Philip Oakley
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to='CAH5451kq-zmy1kFFqx44ba4iM+H4zCF2J3GMc2ppcmoz5=urXA@mail.gmail.com' \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: Feature request: "author branch" in commit object' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox: https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).