Re: improving our workflow with better tools - let's test things.

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 21/10/13 07:41, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > This latter thing bothered me too initially (with GitHub) as I was
> > used to just pulling from the main repo to my local machine and
> > submitting patches via email; but I quickly realized that it was
> > actually sensible, and that those user repos are just places to
> > publish one's own branches, which can then be submitted to the
> > central project for merging.
>
> What me drives crazy is the structure of the main git repository.  If
> you follow github style, the graph gets littered with zillions of
> `merge request' commits, one per pull request, which makes it quite
> hard to follow the development IMHO.

It's true it can get annoying if you have lots of one-commit contributions.  On 
the other hand it lends itself to being able to split your contributions into 
multiple separate commits for which the main git history simply gets a summary 
(the merge commit).

I still think it's ultimately worth it for the discipline of "No one pushes 
directly to master", which helps enforce a requirement that everything gets 
tested and reviewed, even stuff by core developers.