Mailing-List: contact dev-help@asterixdb.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@asterixdb.incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: chillery@hillery.land
Sender: ceej@lambda.nu
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHWyyRz-NTu7cfQT0JKEVNiCbDKnh-Xon_VebVOyTwn_vucoQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAHWyyRxv+EpzvybwFQLJR0wd5i=UuVc=HTqLd365UEpXj4LHCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANQf6Dq_Xm2TEjfpDFxTr1psctJ3zWC6fygZRJRBizNZBjWqMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHWyyRzDWb8Jb8xK19y3VySbZMCPKKgLZcOrZNr8Ny7j1T-eVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <920C6B5B-B0E8-4F3A-AC9E-5DC8FEECC18D@gmail.com>
 <CAHWyyRz-NTu7cfQT0JKEVNiCbDKnh-Xon_VebVOyTwn_vucoQw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris Hillery <chillery@hillery.land>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:38:51 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAHWyyRxoHJnQ5SCjS2z=RicO-RXgbRXPPyEdZQe_8U9AsCswxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Merging vs. squashing
To: Jianfeng Jia <jianfeng.jia@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@asterixdb.incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3ca1e7b99f4052071c8e7

--001a11c3ca1e7b99f4052071c8e7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

P.S. I'd love it if anyone else with opinions or experience would chime in
here... I'm pretty sure I don't have all the answers, so I don't want to
seem like I'm trying to dictate the discussion.

Ceej
aka Chris Hillery

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Chris Hillery <chillery@hillery.land>
wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Jianfeng Jia <jianfeng.jia@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I hit another similar scenario that squash may make things harder.
>>
>> Now I=E2=80=99m working the UTF8 encoding task. Some part of work has be=
en done
>> in Taewoo=E2=80=99s branch. But his branch is a bigger change that won=
=E2=80=99t get into
>> master
>> soon. I=E2=80=99d like to cherry-pick several commits from his branch an=
d then
>> continue
>> on my task. Then both of us won=E2=80=99t hit the merging conflict in fu=
ture.
>>
>
> That is, I believe, already not true. Cherry-pick and squashed merge have
> basically the same effect - they create a new commit with no lineage to t=
he
> original. If you cherry-pick from his branch, then even if you merged you=
rs
> to the trunk (rather than squashing), he'd still get conflicts the next
> time he updated.
>
> I will admit I'm not 100% sure I'm correct about this. I've seen some
> evidence that git can handle a rebase when the two branches each have a
> *single* commit which happens to contain precisely the same diffs, as wou=
ld
> happen with a cherry-pick that didn't require any conflict resolution of
> its own. I'm not confident this always works, and I've never experimented
> to see if it works on a merge rather than a rebase. I wouldn't want to ma=
ke
> any sweeping process decisions until at least we were sure we understood
> what works and what doesn't.
>
> If we did merges all the time instead of squashes and cherry-picks, then
> you would be able to share some of Taewoo's work if you could *merge* it =
to
> your branch. But as you might guess, merging a couple of changes from the
> middle of a foreign branch is quite challenging at best.
>
> Ceej
> aka Chris Hillery
>

--001a11c3ca1e7b99f4052071c8e7--