Yes I think the branch per feature workflow is not so bad. Actually I am
fairly new to it myself. At work we used clearcase for a long time - a
very different concept.
When we started working with git it was mostly just working on the head
- We were lucky to have at least one person working on a module !!
The disadvantages:
You have to be very careful that you are working on the right branch. I
do "git status" a lot !
All your nice fixes and features are not available in the other branches
until they get merged into main and then merged into the working branch.
But so far I think it is working well.
Philip
On 4/7/21 9:00 PM, Ted Felix wrote:
On 3/30/21 9:43 AM, Philip Leishman wrote:
3. If there are changes on master I can merge these into my working
branch.
This is the part that surprises me mainly because I usually set devs
at work up with a patch-based workflow to start. Hoping to get them
to the point where they can contribute to open source if they ever
feel the desire. git format-patch can't handle merges, though, and
that makes a mess of things.
However I was pleasantly surprised when I did my first merge of one
of your branches with merges in it and all was well. Very nice.
I should probably abandon the patch-based workflow at work and force
everyone to do the fork/merge request workflow. I think that's more
relevant these days anyway.
Ted.
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
Rosegarden-devel@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to
unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
Rosegarden-devel@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
