Which is an option part of git flow but maybe take a look at a better explanation than mine: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ <http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/>
I still don’t see how this complicates resolving conflicts. It just removes the resolution from being a blocker. If some conflict is pushed to master the project is dead until it is resolved (how often have we seen this?) With git flow, not so, because this never happens (or very rarely) You could see the same problem occur in develop but wouldn't best practice be to resolve known conflicts in a separate branch where stakeholders collaborate, then once resolved merge with develop and purge the ephemeral branch? I’ve seen this work well though the work is not and never will be easy, at least it doesn’t get in other people’s way. On Jun 21, 2017, at 2:26 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <dlie...@gmail.com> wrote: PS. but i see the rational. to have stable fixes to get into release. perhaps named release branches is still a way to go if one cuts them early enough. On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <dlie...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Pat Ferrel <p...@occamsmachete.com> wrote: > > Since merges are done by committers, it’s easy to retarget a contributor’s >> PRs but committers would PR against develop, > > IMO it is anything but easy to resolve conflicts, let alone somebody > else's. Spark just asks me to resolve them myself. But if you don't have > proper target, you can't ask the contributor. > > and some projects like PredictionIO make develop the default branch on >> github so it's the one contributors get by default. >> > That would fix it but i am not sure if we have access to HEAD on github > mirror. Might involve INFRA to do it And in that case it would amount > little more but renaming. It would seem it is much easier to create a > branch, "stable master" or something, and consider master to be ongoing PR > base. > > -1 on former, -0 on the latter. Judging from the point of both contributor > and committer (of which I am both).it will not make my life easy on either > end. > >
