From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SaAtp-00066c-BN for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:19:09 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D2A9E07B7; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:18:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gg0-f181.google.com (mail-gg0-f181.google.com [209.85.161.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49952E0653 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggnv5 with SMTP id v5so1251603ggn.40 for ; Thu, 31 May 2012 12:18:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=6XFkwqh1tYaR8H5neCvMi3WmGRtLW7nowcfMI5UVmyg=; b=Bbe9y6iAF62i3GcmWVt7W5Wge/+ZrRqXDfigQwGz6qs+ya2xPg85bUrGmw3clCBT+/ ktLdUDip0/j7laMOnhwbl2mpnVF3JgLgCLqm2xd/TxMhOmVkq3xm/Vc9SZXysjj62fV0 jzLOvW9HokRKrN3TKackLZSVEbezvnyQEFY6TBBDxGlpF+wiXZL8MJt0294CuPDnJfWt UARXkcFgN/diRqgrAHW1zgl+w71itOBXohkmD4rQsx89SDJCAYEGSWhKMHWG+bmmKvkc e01EG2R2+YwjrXCGeAVe3N88fZVzjz1DaYsr6Q9MoXyBr+NOiDaHbDu7jNuLqD1Fr2sT CdAg== Received: by 10.60.25.100 with SMTP id b4mr20001126oeg.64.1338491886709; Thu, 31 May 2012 12:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-77-158.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.77.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id zn5sm3117442obb.18.2012.05.31.12.18.05 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 31 May 2012 12:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Sender: William Hubbs Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 31 May 2012 14:18:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 14:18:04 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver Message-ID: <20120531191804.GA24784@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="azLHFNyN32YCQGCU" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 89825826-d30f-451c-a3a8-e4d8fb49d70d X-Archives-Hash: 1a9c19985146659ab4707b021fa71249 --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 01:48:29PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Robin H. Johnson w= rote: > > 1. > > Discussion on merge policy. Originally I thought we would disallow merge > > commits, so that we would get a cleaner history. However, it turns out = that if > > the repo ends up being pushed to different places with slightly differe= nt > > histories, merges are absolutely going to be required to prevent somebo= dy from > > having to rebase at least one of their sets of commits that are already= pushed. >=20 > Not sure I'm following, but I will be the first to admit that I'm a > git novice. Would this be aided by a convention, like only committing > to master on the gentoo official repository, and any on-the-side work > on places like github/etc stays in branches? Those repositories would > just keep getting fed commits on master from the official repository. Iagree with this; I think we should ban merge commits on master. That would force everyone to rebase their work on current master before they commit to master which would make the history clean. William --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk/Hw+wACgkQblQW9DDEZTg6zQCeKj3tFgR6hISCIl9fJT5BbFFk J4sAoIDG6GAKJTj2AucAmMJ9nJZaKZR/ =9YyZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU--