Folks who squash their #git merges, I’m curious why you are making that trade-off. I’m guessing the pro argument is a cleaner merge graph?
The big argument against it for me is that you lose granularity for git bisect. I've often been able to narrow down breakage (sometimes long past the merge) due to individual commits in the merge. If I'd merged in a giant blob all I'd have had to go by is that giant blob. (1/2)
I have a branch that says it's up to date with the upstream (fork of a repo). I'm trying to contribute a patch, but my commit history in the PR has 26 commits from things that have already been merged rather than my changes from the current head.
Is there an acceptable way to clean up that history so my PR is clean?
Manager: Lets teach a non-developer office worker how to push code to git. "It's just clicking a few buttons. I've done it before. It's not that hard."
oct-git focuses exclusively on ergonomic use with OpenPGP card-based signing keys
It is designed to be easy to set up, standalone (no long running processes), and entirely hands-off to use (no repeated PIN entry required, by default). It comes with desktop notifications for touch confirmation (if required)
Die machen Werbung über sich, dass ihre KI toll einsetzbar sei und dann das, eine übliche Schwäche von Profi-Dienste. Nicht im Detail, sondern was es betrifft.
»Account-Übernahme möglich – Kritische Gitlab-Schwachstelle wird aktiv ausgenutzt:
Die Schwachstelle ermöglicht es Angreifern, beliebige Nutzerpasswörter über eine eigene E-Mail-Adresse zurückzusetzen. Tausende von Gitlab-Instanzen sind gefährdet.«
Magit is one of the "killer apps" of emacs, which one might miss when using a different editor. Helix editor in my case.
gitu is a Git porelain offered in the form of a TUI app with keybindings similar to magit. It's still in active development. I've installed it using cargo for now. https://github.com/altsem/gitu