Re: best git practices, was Re: Git User's Survey 2007 unfinished summary continued
- From
Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de>
- Date
- Oct 25, 2007, 12:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <D94E760B-0DFC-4735-AB8D-3E7B4E47950A@zib.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <472070E5.4090303@op5.se>
On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:33 PM, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
Show 24 quoted lines
>> I slowly start to understand why your users are confused. >> _Nobody_ works on 200 branches at the same time. (No, maintainers >> don't count: they do not work _on_ the branches, but _with_; they >> merge them.) >> When you're done with a topic, why do you leave it around? >> Cluttering up your "git branch" output? > > We have 91 repositories at work. Roughly 60 of those are in active > use. > The active repos are organized pretty much like the git repo with > 'master', 'next' and 'maint'. We *do* work on all branches, but not > every day, ofcourse. They're NOT topic branches. We implement features > on topic-branches that we DO throw away, but those branches HAVE to be > there for us to be able to handle supporting of old versions as > well as > implementing new features in a sane way. Throwing them away locally > would > mean having to re-create them very frequently, and since they have to > exist in the upstream repo, "git fetch" would fetch and re-create them > every single time anyway. > > So please, pretty please just drop the entire "use topic branches" > argument. > We do that, but still have this problem, and it *is* a problem.
This is an interesting situation. If we find a good solution that is accepted by the average developer in daily work. We can probably learn a lot.
Steffen