Workflows, rebase, patch theory

[Matthieu Moy]

Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au> writes:

> I don't see how "information about what happened when" is "noise",
> especially in a system that's designed to preserve exactly that
> information — which is what a VCS is designed to do.

If you have to review a patch serie, you don't care about the mistakes
fixed later in the serie, you don't care about when the author of the
patch merged from upstream, ...

There is a _huge_ difference between the published history, shared by
everybody, and your own private space. The history you publish is a
description of the logic between the starting point, and the end
point. Your private history can contain your mistakes and mess, but
you're the only one who may need it.

The whole idea between "git rebase", "git rebase -i" and other history
rewritting stuff is that you can rework your private history untill it
becomes good enough to be reviewed and merged into the upstream
repository.

-- 
Matthieu