Clean includes#145
Conversation
|
I can merge this. One question, though. Do we want to squash the commits into one when we merge? Github now allows for this and it helps keeping the history cleaner, IMHO. Any @MohammadAlTurany, @pzhristov , @dberzano, @Barthelemy any opinions? |
|
I prefer squashing. One PR == one feature. If one wants to see the detailed commits and comments, she can always click on the PR (which is automatically referenced by GitHub in the squashed commit) and look at the history. Moreover we get rid of "merge commits". As a "disadvantage", whoever works on master and creates PRs from her master (instead of creating it from a separate branch) will not be able to simply pull from the upstream master once the PR is merged, but a |
|
For the record, I also prefer squashing. As it also gives the
opportunity to improve the commit message (like @Barthelemy and myself
did for his "buckets" PR). Strong opinions against this approach?
|
|
Hi, |
|
@MohammadAlTurany Yes of course, but I was referring to the source branch not to the destination one. I realize my comment was not so clear. If a user has her branch called |
|
Ok, since no one else complained I merged this. |
…roup#145) * Extend Xicc pT to 36 and change rapidity binning in TH3F * Implement d0xd0 variables for Xicc * Fixing clang format * Fixing column and label ordering * Adding
Remove the Alfa_DIR from the cmake files and update the installation instructions (GH-#30)