While you are thinking about John's questions, another John has more:
I am thinking about using automatic git branches to support a slightly
different work flow in Orion+Firebug. Firebug will be monitoring your
changes character at a time. Once Firebug concludes that a patch is
syntax correct, the edit would be saved to the server on a new branch.
Subsequent changes would be committed to the branch individually. When
the dev pushes "Save" it really means "merge" the auto branch back to
the master (or what ever is current).
Any thoughts about this direction?
jjb
John Arthorne wrote:
We have started to use
lots of branches
for code reviews, etc. This is great because it helps us work out our
multi-branch
workflows in the Orion client, and shows we are starting to understand
how to use Git. However it is causing a growing mess in our remote
branch
list, so I have two concrete suggestions to help keep our sanity in the
long term:
1) Include a bug id or date stamp in
the branch name, so we have some hope a few months from now in
understanding
what these branches are. For example does anyone know what the branch
called
"test" or "pending-review" is for?
2) If you create a branch for a
short
term objective like a code review, delete the branch once the commit is
merged into master. I don't see any UI in Orion to perform this yet,
but
you can do it from the Git command line:
git push origin :some-branch
Chime in if you have any other
suggestions.
>From my reading elsewhere, deleting branches in Git is a fairly common
workflow because the Git development style is branch intensive. Of
course
this doesn't delete any commits or code in the repository - it just
removes
a label that no longer has value from a commit. Git experts out there
please
chime in if this doesn't sound reasonable.
John
_______________________________________________
orion-dev mailing list
orion-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orion-dev
|
