"Abhijit Menon-Sen" <ams@oryx.com> writes:
> The only real benefit to review that I can imagine would be if full
> change history were available, which it could do if a) changes were
> committed separately with proper comments and b) if the branch were
> *NOT* rebased, but instead periodically merged with origin/master.
>
> That way I could pull from the repository and run e.g.
> "git-log --stat origin/master..with-recursive" or similar.
Additionally if other people could commit change patches to the repository or
submit patches which upstream could apply then git would be able to update
submitters trees with just the patches they're missing (ie, skipping the
patches they submitted upstream or merging them cleanly)
-- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about
EnterpriseDB'sPostgreSQL training!