[Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

[Charles R Harris]

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Benjamin Root <ben.root at ou.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Charles R Harris <
>> charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Joshua Holbrook <
>>> josh.holbrook at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Charles R Harris
>>>> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Here. This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We
>>>> need to
>>>> > get the word out *not* to do things this way.
>>>> >
>>>> > Chuck
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>>>> > NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
>>>> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> So: Rebase, not merge?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I'm thinking along those lines, but I'm just a dilettante git user. I
>>> tend to merge master to my development branches, merge them back to master,
>>> and then push master to github. That probably isn't the recommended way.
>>> Rebase would probably have the same effect.
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I think the iPython development mailing list recently had a long
>> discussion about proper git usage.  Maybe there is something we can learn
>> from their experience?
>>
>>
> IIRC, they recommended pushing from local branches to master on github and
> not merging master to the development branches. That doesn't sound right to
> me, but perhaps I misunderstood...
>
>
And I just managed the same result on a push to maintenance/1.5.x :-/ But I
know how it happened, I cherry picked from master for a backport before
updating the 1.5.x branch from github. In Retrospect I probably should have
reset the head, pulled from 1.5.x, and then reapplied the backport. Live and
learn.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20101016/190d4b3b/attachment.html>