But, from the original question, I was under the impression that creating and merging multiple small prs were not a possible direction. If that is ok, then it's regular development practice.
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:20 AM, <dusenberr...@gmail.com> wrote: > In my opinion, the problem with using a separate branch with longer-term > work, rather than smaller PRs into the master, is that after several > commits, say 10 or 20, it becomes much more difficult to rebase without > running into nasty merge conflicts, especially when those conflicts are on > an intermediate commit so one would have to remember what the code looked > like at that point in time to properly fix the conflicts. To me, this > invites issues such as duplicated code and slower progress. > > -- > > Mike Dusenberry > GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw > LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry > > Sent from my iPhone. > > > > On May 25, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Berthold Reinwald <reinw...@us.ibm.com> > > wrote: > > > >> the discussion is less about (1), (2), or (3). As practiced so far, (3) > is > >> the way to go. > >> > >> The question is about (A) or (B). Curious was the Apache suggested > >> practice is. > > Apache is key on fostering open collaboration, so specifically about > > branching, having a SystemML branch that is used for > > collaboration/experimentation is probably preferable, as it gives > > visibility to others on the community, enables iterative development > trough > > review of small patches, while shield the trunk of issues these > experiments > > can cause. > > > > I would just recommend to avoid making the branch stale, and keep > rebasing > > it with latest master, which will make integration much easier in the > > future. > > > > > > > > -- > > Luciano Resende > > http://twitter.com/lresende1975 > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > -- Luciano Resende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
