| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Max Bowsher <maxb(at)f2s(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Haggerty <mhagger(at)alum(dot)mit(dot)edu>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: git: uh-oh |
| Date: | 2010-09-07 23:11:22 |
| Message-ID: | 10722.1283901082@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Max Bowsher <maxb(at)f2s(dot)com> writes:
> Hmm. Now I'm speculating vaguely about how the cycle breaker could be
> convinced to break branch update commits into as many pieces as
> possible, instead of as few.
That same thought occurred to me. If it simply didn't aggregate, but
treated each such file separately, would we end up with a saner history?
We would have more individual manufactured commits, but I think they
might be less surprising.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-07 23:11:52 | Re: git: uh-oh |
| Previous Message | Max Bowsher | 2010-09-07 23:03:07 | Re: git: uh-oh |