On 05/08/2016 01:21 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 01:44:43PM +0800, cbergstrom@pathscale.com wrote:
>> Don't be crazy - I know many developer groups which dislike merge
>> commits. That nonlinear work flow is just a mess long term.
> 
> Really?  What "mess" does it cause?
> 
> Are things harder to bisect?  Harder to determine what came before what?
> Harder to do future development?  Harder because it is unfamiliar
> compared to the cvs workflow?
> 
> Or just "messier" when you look at the graph of the tree?
> 
> What is the _real_ reason that you don't like merges?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

I don't have a strong -- or even clear -- opinion on the matter, but I
could imagine it being a bother to see a bunch of "merge commit" commit
messages in `git log` and not really have much to go on as far as "who
submitted this, who approved it, what does it fix, etc". As far as I
know, there's only the committer information and any GPG-signing that
may have accompanied it, as we do in Gentoo. If I have any details
wrong, please clarify.

I've heard about a way to "redo" history in a git repository as well,
especially before pushing. Could that be a way to mitigate merge
commits, so they are more informative and conform to our commit message
convention?

Sincerely,

a neutral party
-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6