3 ms·
> Git history was only rebased in after the Twitter thread [2]. Any source to this? Your referenced link does not support your hypothesis.
by YetAnotherNick 5y ago
> Git history was only rebased in after the Twitter thread [2].
Any source to this? Your referenced link does not support your hypothesis.
- lelandfe 5y agoYou can see the original commit history in forks of nanocolor that occurred before Andrey Sitnik rebased: * https://github.com/antonk52/nanocolors/commits/main https://github.com/antonk52/nanocolors/commits/main * https://github.com/corysimmons/nanocolors/commits/main?after=2f91133c56727290297872d093bdcadc5b69ab1c+69&branch=main https://github.com/corysimmons/nanocolors/commits/main?after... You can, indeed, see that they lack all of the original repo's commits.
- ctvo 5y agoIn addition to what others have pointed out: https://twitter.com/jorgebucaran/status/1441886210998239238 https://twitter.com/jorgebucaran/status/1441886210998239238 The commits in nanocolor's git history also don't include Jorge's verified signature, which would come with the fork.