2 ms·

I think a large part of this is about how a branch is expected to be used. Branches that people are expected to track (i.e. pull from or merge into their regul

by ongy 9mo ago

I think a large part of this is about how a branch is expected to be used. Branches that people are expected to track (i.e. pull from or merge into their regularly) should never rebase/force-push. Branches that are short-lived or only exist to represent some state can do so quite often.

thibaut_barrere 9mo ago
It is this, plus more: - the web tooling must react properly to this (as GH does mostly) - comments done at the commit level are complicated to track - and given the reach of tools like GH, people shooting their own foot with this is (even experienced ones) most likely generate a decent level of support for these tools teams
xlii 9mo ago
Also branches that are write-only by a single person by consensus. E.g. "personal" PR branches that are not supposed to be modified by anyone but owner.