Why not rebase instead of merge?

[Stephen Paul Weber]

Somebody claiming to be Andy Georges wrote:
>On 22 Feb 2013, at 17:50, Geoffrey Mainland <mainland at apeiron.net> wrote:
>> I don't want to bike shed, but the prevalence of empty merge commits in
>> the repo seems both undesirable and avoidable.
>I guess because rebasing means actually rewriting history. Which is 
>undesirable in itself. Once commits have been pushed out, you should never 
>rebase, afaik.

git pull --rebase will only end up rebasing commits you have that aren't in 
the remote.  So no public history changes unless you've pushed somewhere 
else already.

-- 
Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma
See <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted
edition right joseph
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130222/e0c27864/attachment.pgp>