[wildfly-dev] Merge Commits

[Jason Greene]

Ah. Well if all you are doing is a single point merge for pull requests, its almost linear in that the history follows a single incremental path. This looks pretty clean if you do git log --topo-order as shown here:

http://fpaste.org/43097/38055146/

You get a pull request merge indicating the start of a set of commits, then the set of commits, and then the next merge. Unfortunately git log defaults to date ordering.

gitk does this nicely by default if you look at the actual commits (topography ordering as above), however the way it renders the graph I admit looks strange, and that's because it tries to show you the source point of each individual commit.

On Sep 30, 2013, at 9:22 AM, Steve Ebersole <steve at hibernate.org> wrote:

> gitk, etc
> 
> By "messes up" I just mean that they are harder to read.  Spaghetti lines of history versus nice linear history.
> 
> On 09/30/2013 09:19 AM, Jason Greene wrote:
>> Which tools?
>> 
>> On Sep 30, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Steve Ebersole <steven.ebersole at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Merge over rebase of course messes up many history tools.
>>> 
>>> I actually asked of GitHub support for the ability to rebase pull requests through the UI in much the same way we can merge already.  I cannm let you know if/when i hear back.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon 30 Sep 2013 09:15:39 AM CDT, Jason Greene wrote:
>>>> On Sep 30, 2013, at 5:03 AM, Darran Lofthouse <darran.lofthouse at jboss.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is it intentional we have switched to 'Merge' commits for pull requests?
>>>> I'm exploring them as a way to speed up our merge process and provide better auditing. No decision yet.
>>>> 
>>>>> e.g.
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/commit/97ce5300f4277be023a112531b00dfa4beda4bdd
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jason it is going to look like you have authored everything and in the
>>>>> future using annotate or browsing the history it is going to be more
>>>>> complex to identify why previous lines of code were written ;-)
>>>> That's not true. A merge commit links to the original author history. Github just displays the delta to be friendly. Git annotate also will show the original author sha1 and not the merge sha1.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Jason T. Greene
>>>> WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
>>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>>>> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>> --
>> Jason T. Greene
>> WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>> 
> 

--
Jason T. Greene
WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat