David Brown wrote:
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 06:50:13PM -0700, Lan Barnes wrote:
But branching just because you want to check something in you don't have
working yet makes little sense.
I think this philosophy must come from revision control systems that make
branches expensive. With my git development, everything I checkin is
already on a branch. I can very cheaply create new branches. It is
typical to have several branches going at the same time, especially if I'm
working on more than one idea at a time.
But, without free branches, it's probably hard to see just how useful this
No, it's more about "what does a branch indicate?".
For me, a branch is something that is *not* going to get reintegrated
back into the main line later on in the future. And, Lan's examples
seem to be pointing in that same direction.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
