3 ms·
Huge respect for your work on SQLite. I can’t say I agree with this though. > If you change the history to something that is materially different, which rebas
by jeeeb 6y ago
Huge respect for your work on SQLite.
I can’t say I agree with this though.
> If you change the history to something that is materially different, which rebase does, then you are lying about the history. You cannot white-wash this fact.
I use rebase to clean up the history of my feature branches before merging to release branches.
In that sense I don’t see a moral difference between not committing my work at all until it’s complete and rebasing. It doesn’t seem like any more of a rewriting of history than just editing text before each commit.
The nice thing about rebasing is that future readers don’t need to see the 20 commits I created titled “wip” just so I could back up my work at the end of the day or push to a test server.
- chmaynard 6y agoThere is a better way to achieve your goal of removing uninteresting commits from the project history. Rather than explain it here, I will write an article about it and post it on HN. Stay tuned.