On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 03:30:03AM +0100, Thomas Funk wrote: > One point: > Should we use for development branches a special nomination like feature_xy, > fix_abc? > Or only a README which describes the feature/fix?
I don't think that's necessary. Typically, you have this pattern: initials/rough-branch-description Which denotes---by the initials---who's mainly working on the branch, so for example: ta/fix-clang-warnings Should denote that I am working on a branch which fixes warnings from Clang. Similarly, there's also "git branch --edit-description" which can further annotate a branch, usually more helpful when issuing pull-requests. Perhaps in a more wider-context, if a branch ends up not having a prefix, it might mean more than one person is working on it. But I don't think this really needs documenting. > To think about this point: > http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ Hmm. I have always been against this design---this is what lead to the whole git-flow set of tooling, which completely locks you in to one way of working. We really do not need anything as complicated as that. -- Thomas Adam -- "Deep in my heart I wish I was wrong. But deep in my heart I know I am not." -- Morrissey ("Girl Least Likely To" -- off of Viva Hate.)