undefined | Better HN

0 pointssulam10y ago0 comments

It's not destroyed, it's simply not on master. If you want to push that branch and have the history forever, that is an option.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

hinkley10y ago· 2 in thread

Anything not stored on the system of record cannot be counted on to exist at any point in the future.

From a strategic standpoint, thinking of that data as anything other than 'destroyed' would be a grave error of judgement. From a retention standpoint the difference between 'could' and 'did' is profound.

jasonlotito10y ago

> Anything not stored on the system of record cannot be counted on to exist at any point in the future.

That's an issue with GitHub itself, not an issue with the method of squashing commits before merging into master. See gerrit as a prime example of separating reviewing code and your master branch.

cdcarter10y ago

If you have an issue with people deleting branches that were intentionally preserved to save history that was then squashed onto master, that's not the fault of anyone who squashed their commits but left them preserved on a branch.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse