Re: Rebasing or merging? [was: Re: 01/03: gnu: wxwidgets: Add libxtst to inputs.]

[Maxim Cournoyer]

Hi Leo,

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:

> On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 08:47:54PM -0400, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>> I'm not sure how that'd work, since Git only allows a single PGP
>> signature per commit, as far as I can tell.  When you rewrite the
>> history (by using rebase, say), the existing signatures of the rewritten
>> (rebased) commits are replaced with new ones generated from your key.
>
> Is it so bad to re-sign commits on feature branches that we should lose
> the easy-to-read history of rebased branches?

It's no the end of the world, but if it's avoidable, it should be, in my
opinion.  A bigger problem with rebasing is that it means a single
person can push changes to the rebased branch.  As discussed previously
in this thread, a good policy would be to suggest avoid *both* rebases
and merges during a feature branch development.  This way we avoid both
problems, and if the branch is short lived, it should be bearable that
is isn't synced with master for its short lifetime.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim