<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Hi,</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 5:19 PM Schulz, Roland <<a href="mailto:roland.schulz@intel.com">roland.schulz@intel.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
But this requires that the branch can be fast-forwarded and not just that it's conflict free (like our current setup) right? This is equivalent <br>
This means that we will require much more manual rebasing in the future prior to merging because it is required even if there is no merge conflict.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>Yes, I recognize that nomenclature, so that's probably it. On the other hand, since it's a choice per-change we can always choose to merge somethings as patch chains instead. Some things will likely hurt a bit, and this might very well be one of them.</div><div><br></div><div>However: Unless we have a volunteer stepping forward and offering to first fix all the outstanding issues we have with Gerrit+Jenkins+Redmine, improve performance and then keep supporting it for everyone else, sticking to our current setup is not an alternative. We need something drastically simpler to maintain.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div><br></div><div>Erik</div></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Erik Lindahl <<a href="mailto:erik.lindahl@dbb.su.se" target="_blank">erik.lindahl@dbb.su.se</a>></div><div>Professor of Biophysics, Dept. Biochemistry & Biophysics, Stockholm University</div><div>Science for Life Laboratory, Box 1031, 17121 Solna, Sweden</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>