I think the difference is because you mail in your changes to master, and I'm having developers cooperate in advancing that branch. The only thing I need a local copy of dev for is to checkout during the "work completed" phase, in which case the topic's result is added to the top of dev for all to see, either as a single amalgamated checkin or a non-ff merge.
Can you suggest a better way of doing that, where "better" means minimizing the number of cookbook incantations to learn?
If, during that procedure, the instruction to
git checkout dev
were replaced by one that checks out the remote and creates the local at that time (what is the argument?), then after pushing the result, delete the local dev.
Keeping the local dev around has the advantage of being able to see what changes have taken place without having to be implicit by eyeballing where your topics branch off from, and makes it clear what you've read/understood already even if you are not going to rebase your topic.
--John
TradeStation Group, Inc. is a publicly-traded holding company (NASDAQ GS: TRAD) of three operating subsidiaries, TradeStation Securities, Inc. (Member NYSE, FINRA, SIPC and NFA), TradeStation Technologies, Inc., a trading software and subscription company, and TradeStation Europe Limited, a United Kingdom, FSA-authorized introducing brokerage firm. None of these companies provides trading or investment advice, recommendations or endorsements of any kind. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.