Repository navigation
doc: explain why we don't use the GitHub merge button #8893
Description
Activity
- addeddocIssues and PRs related to Node.js documentation.Issues and PRs related to Node.js documentation.
on Oct 2, 2016 the latest rebase feature changes the author
the old rebase and merge feature adds meta data to the commit title
the original merge method adds a merge commit
On Sun, Oct 2, 2016, 1:53 AM Rich Trott notifications@github.com wrote:
I get asked this at onboardings from time to time and I never know what
issues with it are real and what's just in my mind.onboarding.md currently says:
- Please never use GitHub's green "Merge Pull Request" button.
- If you do, please force-push removing the merge.
And that's it. One or two sentences explaining the deal-breaker
incompatibilities with our workflow would be great. @cjihrig
https://github.com/cjihrig? Someone else?—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#8893, or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecVzDskV5JaHh9uSbBEZ2RUDqgIIDyks5qv0a7gaJpZM4KL8Sz
.Reacted by 狼叔, viswanathankasi, Rich Trott, Gibson Fahnestock, Prince John Wesley, Colin Ihrig, Jeremiah Senkpiel and Anna Henningsen- Please never use GitHub's green "Merge Pull Request" button.
the old rebase and merge feature adds meta data to the commit title
Squash/merge does that by default, but isn't it possible to modify the commit message while merging?
@not-an-aardvark I've personally experienced it adding the meta data without an obvious way to avoid it. At the very least it is error prone enough that I do not believe the pain is worth the benefit
the latest rebase feature changes the author
yep, I dealt with that last week while cutting v6.7.0.
I would say that @thealphanerd's comment (#8893 (comment)) describes it pretty well.
Yeah, what @thealphanerd said.
(All of which make viewing commits / tooling / attribution / etc more difficult.)
Have we documented anywhere why we add
Reviewed-By? I'm not sure what it's good for.It's like
git blamefor reviewers.Have we documented anywhere why we add
Reviewed-By? I'm not sure what it's good for.It also gives a list of people to @mention / contact when something goes wrong, and doesn’t require the assumption that Github lasts forever for that ;)
Reacted by Jeremiah Senkpiel and F. Hinkelmann- addedgood first issueIssues that are suitable for first-time contributors.Issues that are suitable for first-time contributors.
on Oct 7, 2016 We generally don't use Github merge button when we don't want the changes in our branch to be merged with the upstream branch ; for this we can also close the pull request without merging.
- added 2 commits that reference this issue
on Oct 12, 2016 Hello everybody, I took a shot at this and have opened up a pull request. Hopefully some of you can review it and see if it closes this issue.
Thank you :)
Reacted by F. Hinkelmann and Andreas Madsen- added a commit that references this issue
on Oct 14, 2016 - added 2 commits that reference this issue
on Oct 14, 2016 - added a commit that references this issue
on Jul 27, 2026
I get asked why we can't use the GitHub merge button at onboardings from time to time and I never know what issues with it are real and what I merely imagine.
onboarding.md currently says:
And that's it. One or two sentences explaining the deal-breaker incompatibilities with our workflow would be great. @cjihrig? Someone else?