My initial impression is that Git is designed to make complicated team workflows possible rather than simple team workflows easy. The fact that nobody agrees on how to do things is indicative that it is overly complex.
I've read the chapter of the Git book about how it just stores files, trees, and commits in a content-addressable filesystem, and the architecture seems elegant. But the commands on top of that architecture are less so. - Gordon -----Original Message----- From: Michael Schmalle [mailto:apa...@teotigraphix.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 4:05 PM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: RE: Git's "branches are cheap and fast but modal" model Ha, I just had this same scenario today and was talking to Roland about it. I'm learning the darker recesses if GIT now to Gordon since I am working with more people. Its really easy when the team is not complicated. I asked this exact same question, "Why would I commit, if I'm not ready to commit if I just want to sync the branch". I do like GIT better than SVN and I was hardcore svn for years, GIT has a huge learning curve but, once you get passed it you will see you over thought some principles it uses. Mike Quoting Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com>: > That seems silly. I wouldn't want to commit if the code is in some bad > state. What would I put for the commit message... "Oops, gotta go."? > > - Gordon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sylvain Lecoy [mailto:sylvain.le...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:57 PM > To: dev@flex.apache.org > Subject: Re: Git's "branches are cheap and fast but modal" model > > When you work on a branch, and you want to work on another branch, you > first have to commit in the current branch you working on to save your > work. > > Then, you git checkout the branch you want to work on, and so on... > > Cheers ! > > > 2013/3/19 Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> > >> Is that what you do? >> >> - Gordon >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dasa Paddock [mailto:dpadd...@esri.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:38 PM >> To: <dev@flex.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: Git's "branches are cheap and fast but modal" model >> >> You could use the stash command: >> >> http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Stashing >> http://git-scm.com/docs/git-stash >> >> --Dasa >> >> On Mar 19, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> >> wrote: >> >> > I'm having a hard time with the fact that, although Git branches >> > are >> cheap and fast, you can work on only one of them at a time. In >> Subversion, of course, they're just different directories and you can >> have editable files for multiple branches simultaneously. >> > >> > So suppose I'm editing files on one branch and haven't gotten to >> > the >> point where I want to commit. When I want to work on another branch, >> what do I do with those edits? >> > >> > - Gordon >> > >> >> > > > -- > Sylvain Lecoy > > Ingénieur d'étude et développement > > +33(0)6 67 36 20 85 > +44(0)7599 618 024 > -- Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC http://www.teotigraphix.com http://blog.teotigraphix.com
