Re: Merge vs. Rebase

I support it too.
BR
Ulf

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:08 PM <Daniel.DW.Wilms@bmw.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I’m afraid, that Gunnars comment on Ulf’s PR gets lost, so I’ll post it
> here, as I strongly support the request:
>
>
>
> -
>
> I would like to propose, if the group accepts, that rebase (the option
> named rebase-and-merge in GitHub) is preferred over the merge option.
> Otherwise we end up in situations like the above, where the pull request
> itself has some local merges (how?), and basically 3 of the PR commits are
> merges themselves. This PR really only has 3 commits that propose new
> content, and 3 "useless" merge commits. It is messy and IMHO the commit
> content matters, but the PR references you get from a merge commit are only
> useful to keep while reviewing, and then immediately obsolete.
>
> -
>
>
>
> I think rebase is the much better option and I would change it in the
> github settings as the preferred methods, if there are no objections.
>
>
>
> Beste Grüße / Best regards,
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *BMW Technology Office Israel*
>
> Daniel Wilms
>
> Research Engineer
>
>
>
> phone: +972 54 34 20 806
>
> mail: *daniel.dw.wilms@bmwgroup.com <daniel.dw.wilms@bmwgroup.com>*
>
>
>
> postal address:
>
> BMW Technology Office Israel Ltd
>
> 121 Menachem Begin Road
>
> LABS Mailbox numbers: 93-95
>
> Tel Aviv
>
> Israel 8067318
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Ulf Bjorkengren
*Geotab*
Senior Connectivity Strategist | Ph. D.
Mobile +45 53562142
Visit www.geotab.com

Join us at Connect 2020

San Diego

January 13 - 16, 2020

Register Now! <https://www.geotab.com/connect/>