• linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I was trying to learn this again last week. I just play around with this stuff for fun.

    If I want to consolidate all the commits into a a single message (to create a changelog sort of), which kind of merge do I use?

    Another question: I’m torn between wanting to keep a complete history of my work, for my own benefit, and not wanting anyone to see how messy and crappy everything is. I’ve been trying to work in one branch then merge only when a task is “complete”. But it’s a bit confusing for me especially if I leave a project for a while then come back to it. Especially especially if submodules are involved. Is there some sort of convention about how to do this? Or am I thinking about it wrong?

    • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      You want to have commit history, not a commit fairy tale. Once you start rewriting history, it’s not really history any more. The stuff people want to hide tends to be some of the most useful to someone looking through the history to find out how things became the way they are and what was going through the author’s mind when it was written. If things are messy and crappy, it’s better to know that rather than have it covered up.