Programming

17424 readers

88 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz

Git Things (matklad.github.io)

submitted 10 months ago by schalkneethling@programming.dev to c/programming@programming.dev

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] snowe@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That’s why for typical project it is useful to merge pull requests into the main branch — the linear sequence of merge commits is a record of successful CI runs, and is a set of commits you want to git bisect over.

... if you do this you completely negate your ability to use git bisect...

[–] themusicman@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Quite the opposite. If you fast forward merge without squashing, you lose the ability to meaningfully bisect, since only the head of each merge is checked by CI - other commits may not even build

[–] snowe@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

My point was about merging in general. Unless you’re either

Making sure every single commit builds
Squashing and merging, with no merge commit

Then you’re not going to be able to effectively use git bisect.

[–] Fal@yiffit.net 1 points 10 months ago

Squash fast forward merge is the only way