Re: Git & rebase

Date: 2011-06-21 05:55 pm (UTC)
jhw: baleful eye (Default)
From: [personal profile] jhw
Yeah, it's not like Git requires you use 'rebase' to get anything done, but I've seen multiple working groups adopt policies that make using it mandatory, i.e. you do not get your code pulled onto the upstream master branch unless it's a fast-forward. They've made the choice to elide a whole bunch of history that isn't terribly useful, because it's incomplete due to the deficiencies in Git that I'm writing about in this article. This requires a complicated workflow with Git that experience shows me novices find terribly frustrating to learn, whereas if they had simply chosen Mercurial instead of Git, the simple workflow would have sufficed, novices would not be as frustrated by the version control system, and the history that Git users can't figure out how to use would be available under Mercurial and useful because it is complete.

Git could be improved. I'm sad that it won't be.
From:
Anonymous( )Anonymous This account has disabled anonymous posting.
OpenID( )OpenID You can comment on this post while signed in with an account from many other sites, once you have confirmed your email address. Sign in using OpenID.
User (will be screened)
Account name:
Password:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
Subject:
HTML doesn't work in the subject.

Message:

 
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.

Profile

jhw: baleful eye (Default)
j h woodyatt

August 2012

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
121314 15161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 20th, 2017 02:20 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios