If you want to stack your branches in order that's fine and would save rebasing.
Just start with the first and push that as first issue's branch, then continue with second issue on top of first, etc. We'll see from the branch history and if something breaks along the way we can identify it easily. On Sun 22 Jan 2017 at 17:25, Christian Schulte <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 22.01.2017 um 18:14 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > > > Why are you needing to rebase constantly? > > > > > > Unless the merge has conflicts you should be fine pushing to master post > > > merge... if there is a test failure post merge (due to an unanticipated > > > interaction) we can just add the fix on top > > > > If something changes on master, I'd need to pull those changes in, or I > > cannot fast-forward push the branch to master. I have quite a few issues > > updating the DefaultModelBuilder, for example. I created multiple > > branches for those issues. Merging them one by one to master means I > > need to rebase the other branches and resolve any conflicts. Having all > > those related issues on a single branch would look similar to the > > pre-reset-master branch with the only difference that commits are > > squashed by issue. We are doing this to ease review. It would be way > > easier here if I could create a single branch for all related issues. > > Effort is growing exponentially using the RTC process with branches here. > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Christian > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > -- Sent from my phone
