Which merge type should we use?

[diazona]

@redtoad @coordt Do you have any thoughts about whether we should enforce a linear history, or force rebasing before merging but still use merge commits, or just allow merging MRs with or without rebasing first? Personally I'm a fan of the latter - if nothing else it's the most flexible - but that's just me.

Also, hope you don't mind that I enabled discussions. I figured this might be useful.

[redtoad]

I quite like "rebasing before merging but still use merge commits" which makes it easier to see what went in.

[redtoad]

Same here. Well, let's just go for the merge then.

[diazona]

Cool, I unchecked squash and rebase. We can see what @coordt thinks too before we put this discussion to rest.

[coordt]

I'm not a huge fan of squash and rebase. I find that somehow I end up with a screwed-up rebase and lost work.

[redtoad]

Come to think of it, rebase before merge seems like too much trouble. There must be a reason why Github isn't showing the commit graphs...

[diazona]

Huh, I hadn't even noticed that. I wouldn't expect it to be messed up by rebasing, but I'm not sure.