Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> But other projects prefer to keep the messy history intact.
> For one thing, it makes collaboration on a topic easier, as
> developers can simply pull from each other during the messy
> development. And two, that history may later be useful when
> tracking down a bug, because it gives more insight into the
> actual thought process of the developer.
>
> But in this latter case you want _two_ views of history. You
> may want to see the "simple" version in which a series of
> fully-formed topics hit the branch (and you would like to
> see the diff of their final form). Or you may want to see
> the messy details, because you are digging into a bug
> related to the topic.
While I can see the reasoning behind the above [*1*], I am not sure
if the output with "--first-parent" would always be a good match for
the "simple" version. Wouldn't the people who keep these messy
histories also those who merge project trunk into a random topic and
push the result back as the updated project trunk? Admittedly, that
merely is saying that "--first-parent" is not a solution to such a
project, and does not say much about the usefulness of the new
configuration, so I'd queue it as-is.
[Footnote]
*1* I do not necessarily agree, though. The history being messy is
a sign that "the actual thought process of the developer" was
not clearly expressed in the work, and it is not likely that you
have more insight by looking at it---you will see more mess, for
certain, though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html