On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Uwe Stöhr <uwesto...@web.de> wrote: > What is the benefit of branching for every feature? Why is it not as simple > as in SVN where when I commit a thing that has been meanwhile changed, the > change is automatically merged before my things are committed? > > For me Git is much, much more complicated than SVN. Lars advertised Git as > advantageous but for normal users it is not. It is totally unintuitive and > consumes more time and space on my harddisk. It might be advantageous if you > are an expert, but I don't have the resources to take a full day only > learning Git.
Hi Uwe, Lars advices are probably too complicated for you. Git is complicated only if you want to. Please follow this simple workflow and all will be well: # create a new branch 'uwe' git branch uwe < ... develop ... > git commit < ... develop more ... > git commit < ... develop some more ... > git commit # you want other developers to see your work: git push # you want to check what's going on in master: git pull git log (or TortoiseGit log) # You notice some new features in master that you want to test, so merge 'master' onto your 'uwe' branch: git merge master git commit # You think your branch is good now and worth being merged to 'master'. Bug Vincent or Richard about it: they will do the merge into master for you. After a while, if Vincent or Richard allows you and you are more comfortable with git maybe you could merge directly to 'master' yourself. Abdel.
