-1

I have a github repo that is currently set to private. I'd like to make it public but before doing so would like to clean it up a little bit by squashing some commits and possibly rebasing so that the history is easier to read and contains less minor commits (version bumps, typo fixes etc.).

I know that changing history on a published repo will create problems for any other users that have pulled from the repo. But will changing history on a repo that only I currently have access to create any issues when I make that repo public?

I'm also curious if others would rather see the full history with warts and all or a cleaned up version though that seems very subjective.

Adam42
  • 1
  • 1
  • 2
    [Is version history really sacred or is it better to rebase?](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/q/151541/31260) – gnat Aug 05 '15 at 17:19
  • 1
    I am confused. You ask about changing published history, but according to your question your history hasn't been published? – Jörg W Mittag Aug 05 '15 at 17:26
  • @JörgWMittag I've published the history to my private repo. Meaning I can see the history on github.com but I'm the only one who can see it right now. So it's published but only to an audience of one (me) right now. Does that clarify? – Adam42 Aug 05 '15 at 17:31

1 Answers1

1

Its problematic if you already work with others, rebase/tidy up your history of a branch where other participants work with and push it afterwards to a public repository. Other participants of your project will have major problems. See -> this explanation

But you work alone so far. There will be no problems if you publish your repository now. You will get into trouble if you now change the history after publishing via rebase while other people work on that branch.

Rubinum
  • 134
  • 5