But all intersections are squash.
Pickleball?
I dunno, I love eating a nice fresh-grown water polo
I never thought about it and instantly wanted to reply “wait why can’t you do that‽” but now that I thought about it, what would you want the history to look like in that case? A slightly weird rebase? A single commit which seemingly copy pasted the entire other branch with no relation to it left behind?
Sometimes you really don’t want to look over the commit history of your colleagues. As long as it’s a small feature, a single commit is a pretty good option.
Rather than:
- implemented X
- forgot this
- oh, this was not needed
- now tests actually pass
- oops
- fixed this
- should be ready
That’s basically my commit history for every repo where I need the pipeline to run to see if everything works.
Haha same. But that’s why you do it in another branch, and then squash-merge.
I’m not a fan of changing history in general. Rebase can also he dangerous.
I think ultimately it’s a matter of scale. Sometimes it can be useful to look into the details of the development of a single feature, but in a large project, that rarely happens. I’m not a fan of squashing, but for large projects, it helps to keep your history manageable.
If you were gonna replace something you should’ve replaced “vegetables” because squash is a fruit.
The term “vegetable” is a culinary term, and squash is prepared like a vegetable. For another example, tomatoes are fruits but are prepared like vegetables. Squash and tomatoes can be both fruits AND vegetables. This is my position on the “is X a fruit or vegetable?” issue.
I mean, the idea of a “vegetable” isn’t a well defined group of plant parts like fruits are. Vegetables are a mix of seeds, roots, leaves, stems, etc. all of which are quite different. It’s just “parts of a plant that can be cooked as part of a meal”:
“a usually herbaceous plant (such as the cabbage, bean, or potato) grown for an edible part that is usually eaten as part of a meal also : such an edible part” according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vegetable (similar definitions exist for other dictionaries, some highlight that vegetables are usually used to make non-sweet dishes)
The TLDR is that vegetables are loosely defined as “plant parts that are used to prepare meals, usually non-sweet dishes” and is a culinary term rather than a botanical one like fruits can be. So an item (like tomatoes or squash) can be both a vegetable and a fruit, the former culinary and the latter botanically. They aren’t mutually exclusive.
Depends on which classification system you use. Botaically it is a fruit. But culinarily it is a vegetable.
