Re: Questions about branches in git

From: Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 28, 2010, 20:35 UTC
Message-ID: <4b61f52f.1d255e0a.4cc1.7f37@mx.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <b4087cc51001281203q1f467480sdf848c9d3ced323b@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> These Ã¼bercommits would also allow developers to make a string of
> commits that by themselves break things but together formulate a
> complete solution; because the Ã¼bercommits encapsulate the breakage,
> bisection would still be simple (no fear of dealing with broken
> commits), but the small manageable commits would still be available

As a corollary to this, developers can maintain patch integrity.

Quite often, I've sent a patch off to some project only to have the maintainer `tweak' the result before making a commit. However, I frankly don't want my name attached to someone else's work, because I may disagree with what has been done.

Were Ã¼bercommits available, the maintainer could commit my original work and then make a new `tweak' commit and then bundle the 2 together as an Ã¼bercommit in order to encapsulate this series of events.