Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>> Might it be worthwhile to allow some sort of "staging repository" and
>> actually start using the git stuff a bit more around this?
> ... As far as I can see, this basically amounts to
> bundling lots of unrelated changes into one big pile and then asking
> to have them all committed at once instead of one at a time, which
> sounds like more work not less, unless we're just going to blindly
> merge without reviewing, in which case we may as well just let people
> commit to the main repository themselves.
Yeah. I'm also worried that we would either lose linear history, or
(if we squash the merge commits) lose change log history for the
individual fixes. Neither of those sounds terribly attractive.
We've frequently had, and still have today, committers who are
understood to have limited areas of expertise and are given commit
bits on the honor system to not break what they don't know well.
I don't have any problem with continuing in that line.
regards, tom lane
