Comment by malisper
2 days ago
The dev process carries over from when we constantly rewrote the codebase from scratch every few weeks[0]. We ran many experiments, most of which we threw away. A small number became part of "pgrust". It didn't seem worth it to maintain public branches with all of our development effort when we knew 80% of it was going to be thrown away
But you can make the branch public without committing to maintaining an experimental branch, this doesn't make sense.
It makes sense. Just because one can do a thing doesn’t mean they must want to do it.
It’s like everyone who squash merges for a clean timeline. You want you dev process to look prestine and communicate what changes were kept, not every experiment that failed.
Have you happen to have seen the 3 commits? They are over 1000 file diffs, that is not pristine or communicating changes the way devs do.
1 reply →
If you've been accused of cheating it is a very different scenario.