Re: git: uh-oh

Max Bowsher <maxb@f2s.com> writes:
> Hmm. Now I'm speculating vaguely about how the cycle breaker could be
> convinced to break branch update commits into as many pieces as
> possible, instead of as few.

That same thought occurred to me.  If it simply didn't aggregate, but
treated each such file separately, would we end up with a saner history?
We would have more individual manufactured commits, but I think they
might be less surprising.

			regards, tom lane