Re: reject merges on gdb release branches?

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:58:07 +0400
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org>, ricard.wanderlof@axis.com,
> 	gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> > It is helpful to anyone who wishes to understand the sequence of
> > events that led to a certain line being what it is.  Merges are in
> > important part of that.  E.g., suppose that a merge produced a
> > conflict whose resolution mistakenly introduced a bug.  If you
> > eliminate the merge, you will be unable to understand the reasons for
> > the buggy change, at least not easily.
> 
> If there are conflicts between your branch and the master branch,
> and those conflicts are not trivial to resolve, the commits needs
> to be reviewed again.

Of course.  I'm talking about the situation after they are resolved
and the result is committed.

> > Anyway, we are going in circles.  I'm not trying to convince you to
> > change your workflow, I'm asking to allow me to keep mine.
> 
> But this is at the cost of everyone else finding it more difficult
> afterwards each time they consult the history.

What difficulty are you talking about?  Can you demonstrate on a real
history log that difficulty?