Re: question concerning branches

From: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2009, 19:50 UTC
Message-ID: <32541b130908191250w79461592vf1bed7874aa4138b@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4a8c51f5@wupperonline.de>

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Ingo Brueckl<ib@wupperonline.de> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> You finish old work (or stash it away), _then_ you begin new work.
>
> Ok, this helps me a little bit to understand.
>
> The branches aren't designed to split my work, but rather something to
> collect the different parts of my work.
>
> But as software development often is something where you are coding on
> several issues at the same time which can't be committed immediately, it
> sounds that 'stash' is the developer's best friend.

Or you could just 'commit' more frequently, but don't 'push' so you're not disturbing anyone else until you're done.

This is a big difference from how centralized VCSs work: there, a commit is a major operation that you're afraid to do in case you make someone else mad. In git, commits are cheap, you just need to be careful about pushing.

(You can also clean up your series of commits before pushing by using 'git rebase')

Have fun,

Avery