From: Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:09:01 GMT
Subject: Re: best git practices, was Re: Git User's Survey 2007 unfinished summary continued
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:

>> 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