Subject: Re: [boost] question/guidence regarding merge to master
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-01-11 14:30:22
On 1/11/19 5:29 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
> I think, squashing commits when merging to master is a terrible idea
> because it makes tracking differences between develop and master
When I look at the history of develop and master I expect to see:
on develop - all the history which led me to each release.
on master - the history of the releases - and nothing else.
As it is now - I see in the master the detailed history with a lot small
changes - same as the develop. It makes me reluctant to check small
changes to develop knowing that all this transient unintrestesing and
confusing history will be forever with us.
I guess it comes down to this. If the master is just a copy of develop
then what's the point of it? It's just one more thing to get out sync.
Having a master only seems to make sense if it's a different thing - ie
a history of releases.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk