Re: Why not rebase instead of merge?

Somebody claiming to be Andy Georges wrote:

On 22 Feb 2013, at 17:50, Geoffrey Mainland 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