Ok, in short: you're saying ALWAYS use rebase, so we get a nice flat 'history'?
EdB On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Jose Barragan < jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com> wrote: > Erik, > > The content in the two branches are exactly the same, but the new branch > is composed by clean commits only, without any merge-commit in their change > set. > In your current branch, we have a serie of merge-commit in order to > maintain the branch updated. Each of those commits contain all changes from > develop at point where was created, collapsing on just one commit all > relative change-set from develop until that point. > > In your case, the current branch has been contaminated with a partial > changes from develop and your commits are less readable and reusables using > this way. > > In other sort of things... when we use the git-merge as the only way, the > complexity of commit tree, grows up exponentially. > > I hope that is helpful > > Best regards, > ______________________ > Jose Barragan > Senior Software Engineer > Codeoscopic > +34 912 94 80 80 > http://www.codeoscopic.com > > On 10 Jul 2014, at 19:09, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: > > > Jose, > > > > What is the difference between the 'experimental/VF2JS' and 'VF2JS' > remote > > branches? > > > > EdB > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Jose Barragan < > > jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Erik, > >> > >> Sorry about that, you're right. > >> > >> But after read the atlassian's article, I supposed that I hasn't any > good > >> reason to maintain the proposal alive, because seems as simply is one of > >> two main flavours of work with git, even I keep on thinking that is the > >> best, but maybe is just my point of view. > >> > >> Anyway, just now I remade again the “experimental/VF2JS” branch and push > >> it. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> ______________________ > >> Jose Barragan > >> Senior Software Engineer > >> Codeoscopic > >> +34 912 94 80 80 > >> http://www.codeoscopic.com > >> > >> On 10 Jul 2014, at 17:32, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: > >> > >>> Jose, > >>> > >>> I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like > >> with > >>> your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that > your > >>> way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing > >>> wrong, and how your method is a better workflow. > >>> > >>> Everyone else, > >>> > >>> I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki > does > >>> not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published > >> feature > >>> branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me > what > >> to > >>> do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS > >>> project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow > >>> instructions. > >>> > >>> So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow? > >>> > >>> EdB > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Ix Multimedia Software > > > > Jan Luykenstraat 27 > > 3521 VB Utrecht > > > > T. 06-51952295 > > I. www.ixsoftware.nl > > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
