[petsc-dev] does next model mess up our histories

[Satish Balay]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2014, Jed Brown wrote:

> Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
> >>   Ok, if this can be documented and made as simple as possible? A
> >>   tool to do it? If it requires remember several arcane git commands
> >>   to do and remember the numbers of 5 merges you made, then forget
> >>   it.
> >
> > Perhaps Jed will reply with a simpler 'single' command to do the
> > revert all the merges from the feature branch - and an easy way to
> > verify.
> 
> Nope, but I don't recommend these reverts because it makes it more
> confusing to follow 'next' and to find which commit introduced a change
> (when debugging something in 'next').  My preference is that in normal
> workflow, you don't rebase/modify that which has been merged to 'next'.
> If it's catastrophically wrong, then revert on 'next' and start over,
> but if it just needs a tweak, do that on top of your branch.

I think is ok to be a bit more messy in next. Sure there is a tradeoff
- but you get better debugging in master :)

We shouldn't be doing rebase for every feature branch (thats merged to
next) - but for the very few that might need it - we should ok to do
it.

 And it should be done only when the feature is deemed *complete* [say
1-2 weeks of cooking in next - without a need for updates]

Satish