Hi, > Why is using a local branch important? When using git most branches are local and not shared between developers unless it's needed (in my experience anyway). Although it easy to share between people working on a large feature - have a look at the IDE dev on github and yuo'll see that in action. > Is this because of a branching strategy or is there something about Git that > makes this easier? Mostly github (easier to branch and merge) but you still need need the right branching stategy and as it's easier to branch in git we are likely to have more need to a branch structure/rule than if we used SVN.
I've had a deeper look at the gitflow branching structure and before we vote on using we might want to think about: - What branches are local/what are in the origin repo. Only 2 long lived branches in the gitflow model (ie develop and master) are stored centrally. - Are we going to have issues with cherry picking fixes from develop into master causing unstable releases? May want to consider what Linus has to say on the issue on the issue https://lkml.org/lkml/2008/5/21/351 + https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/12/291. (I do like the idea of stable and next branches mentioned in the second email). - Think carefully about the no fast forward option and it's effects. Look at comments as it may be being incorrectly being used. Do we want it on by default as suggested? - Do we want release branches to be short lived? Main issue this this is (I think) is that's hard to patch issues in previous releases and means any serious bug fix allways going the latest release forcing user of the SDK to allway be on the latest version. I'm really not sure on this one. However note than in Linux development has a stable branch for each release and not a master as such ( see development model at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel). Thanks, Justin
