Re: fast-forward only policy

[Felipe Contreras <felipe contreras gmail com>]

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Ross Burton <ross burtonini com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 12:27 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
>> Le mercredi 06 mai 2009, à 02:21 +0300, Felipe Contreras a écrit :
>> > Debian patches are debian patches, they control them, and they make
>> > debian releases. If GNOME decides to remove those commits the
>> > distributions will not loose their patches.
>>
>> I think this summarize well the whole thing: we do not want to remove
>> commits.
>
> Agreed.  All the way through this thread I've been wondering what
> possible reason there would be for throwing away a commit on a
> historical branch.

It's not about throwing away commits, it's about throwing away unused branches.

I've already explained two ways in which the branches can be thrown
away without loosing the commits although personally I would just
throw the commits away.

My feeling is that if GNOME were using git at the time of those legacy
commits where made, the people developing them would have kept the
changes locally, and by this time, the commits would have been thrown
away anyway. In practice there's no difference between throwing away
local commits and throwing away public commits that nobody will use.

-- 
Felipe Contreras