lø., 20.08.2011 kl. 09.50 +0930, skrev Barrie Treloar:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Kristian Rosenvold
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> [del]
> > After some time with git you just start using branches for "anything you
> > feel like", and imposing that kind of constraint now seems strange. So I
> > bring that back to svn ;)
>
> Off topic.
>
> I use Eclipse to develop in and I've found that if you want to spawn a
> new branch for each change then you really need to spawn a new
> workspace.
> I know IBM's Jazz was doing some funky things under the covers in
> Eclipse to reset your workspace back to the baseline + the changeset
> for the activity you are working on, but I've not seen that become a
> free option.
>
> I dont know if IntelliJ does this better.
I don't know. We switch branch and we just do mvn clean install, at
least if there's existing new commits on it.
>
> Can you elaborate on your work processes?
> (For a lot of reasons a separate branch per change is the better
> choice but practical limitations of SVN/Eclipse/Maturity of CM have
> gotten in the way for me)
>
This is quite interesting; we used to start git with feature-per-branch.
But there is a *cost* to that which is unccessarily high in most cases.
But it's a good strategy when you're a n00b because it's simple.
Our current branch strategy is now not to have a fixed strategy; or
rather we just let the needs of the story drive the branching
requirements, rather than some silly guideline that does not consider
what we're actually doing. This significantly reduces branching costs
and is also a lot more agile;
We don't have a trunk but we only have numbered release-branches, so any
development is based of a given numbered release. Changes flow
downstream.
Stuff that make us likely to branch;
- Are there external dependencies that could hinder this feature from
being deployed as planned (new versions of other systems etc) -> branch
- Is there any kind of political constraint that could restrict the
release -> branch
Stuff that make us less likely to branch or just use local branches for
a short while, or rebase shared branches:
- Is this feature part of the *minimal* required feature set that
*must* be in the next release ? Consider no branches because without
this stuff we're no-go.
- This is just one of those things that seems to have nothing special
about it, no risk or anything.
- Refactoring
- Developers wanting isolation to reduce noise when working on a
feature.
Kristian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
