Hi Mark,
This is a great discussion and I am really starting to see both sides.
Again I am pretty neutral, but still lean to Gitflow.
However (there is always one of those), I have to agree with Alan on the
'cherry picking' issue. It does not tie in with the documentation at
all? I have read
https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows/gitflow-workflow
over and over to try and see where all this work you suggest is coming
from, and I still don't see it?
Where do you see that? I keep reading that Atlasssian document and I don’t see
where it requires cherry picking each and every commit.
You have a master branch and a development branch. All work happens on the
development branch but releases happen from master branch, right? So how do all
the commits end up on the master branch? Someone has to pick the 'good' ones
from the development branch over to the master branch. Especially when a
release comes near.
Releases are taken from develop - 'Once the release is ready to ship,
Mary merges it into master and develop' - This is where I cannot
understand the nature of it's / your dismissal, as it is virtually a one
liner? Someone does play the release manager at some point and all this
Gitflow is just to allow a buffer zone during it's preparation so devs
can carry on oblivious to it.
The first picture in the mentioned docs really paints it for me. I
played out Gitflow step by step on a simple hello world repo and still
can't find 'all this work'?
We have of course jumped ahead of the game with 1.7.x and develop
branches, because we don't have a 2.x release in master yet (ie. the
only thing that should be in master is 2.0.0-Milestone1). It is just to
save a back peddle when we finally get there. Really, as it stands
today, the develop branch 'should' be 1.7.x and 2.x should be in it's
own branch until it takes over as the main release. It would have been
that way if we'd made the transition to git earlier.
What you suggest is, as mentioned in the thread, that we basically do it
the svn way (with the advantages of git locally). We still freeze
checking in potentially unstable stuff while the release is ongoing and
collaborate via the lists as usual. Totally cool with it if that's
really what you want. I was totally cool with svn ;-)
Andy.
--
Andy Gumbrecht
https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe
http://www.tomitribe.com
