Skip to content

CONTRIBUTING: clarify the reason for no force pushes #19387

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

CONTRIBUTING: clarify the reason for no force pushes #19387

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
657afaa
Update CONTRIBUTING.md
Managor Nov 14, 2025
5b84f37
Update CONTRIBUTING.md
Managor Nov 14, 2025
7fe4baa
Revert "Update CONTRIBUTING.md"
Managor Nov 14, 2025
ca43858
Update CONTRIBUTING.md
Managor Nov 20, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion CONTRIBUTING.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ To commit a suggestion to your pull request, click on `Commit suggestion`:
If you want to commit multiple suggestions, go to the "Files changed" tab and batch all suggestions. Now, click the `Commit suggestions` button and enter a commit message to create a single commit.

> [!IMPORTANT]
> Do not force push. We would prefer to preserve commit history so that the order of events is preserved. All pull requests will be squashed so a messy pull request will not matter.
> Do not force push. We would prefer to preserve commit history within the pull request so that the order of events stays chronological. All pull requests will be squashed so the mess will be contained in the PR.
Copy link
Member

@sbrl sbrl Nov 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not so sure this improves clarity.

For example, adding within the pull request suggests that preservation of event order matters only inside the PR, and not e.g. on the main branch.

In the same vein, the mess will be contained in the PR seems a little vague compared to the previous wording, and also conflicts with the above.

Copy link
Member Author

@Managor Managor Nov 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For example, adding within the pull request suggests that preservation of event order matters only inside the PR, and not e.g. on the main branch.

I fail to see the problem here. If PR's are squashed, nobody needs to think about the main branch.

Copy link
Member

@sbrl sbrl Nov 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

From that perspective, why is it that we e.g. do a traditional merge, instead of our current policy of squash+merge?

I was under the impression that it was to ensure the history on the main branch was clean and easy to understand?

Copy link
Member Author

@Managor Managor Nov 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think these are in opposition. Anyways, I made a new commit that adjusts the wording a little bit ca43858

### Commit message and PR title

Expand Down
Loading