Just my 50ct to this topic:

At the Apache Flex project we too introduced GitFlow (even if we never 
explicitly called it that way)
Working on Develop and having Master in the state of the last release is a very 
good thing to have (in my opinion). this way someone can always start with a 
working build as Develop usually tends to be buggy now and then.

I don’t quite understand why you claim that a merge from develop to master 
after a release adds another day to the process … no commit should to to master 
and therefore there shouldn’t be any conflicts. So a merge should be a 
on-command thing in Git.

Also one thing with the feature branches. In flex some people tend to start 
working on something together. So they start a feature-branch and work  on that 
… as soon as that’s finished they might decide to give it up or to merge the 
stuff back to develop. This way their experiments don’t interfere with any 
other people. 

I think it’s a good thing.

Chris

-- 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen | Best regards
Christofer Dutz | Senior IT Consultant

codecentric AG | An der Welle 4 | 60322 Frankfurt am Main | Deutschland 
mobil: +49 (0) 1525.3057806 | fax: +49 (0) 69.7593-8200
www.codecentric.de | blog.codecentric.de | www.meettheexperts.de | 
www.more4fi.de    


Sitz der Gesellschaft: Düsseldorf | HRB 63043 | Amtsgericht Düsseldorf
Vorstand: Michael Hochgürtel . Mirko Novakovic . Rainer Vehns
Aufsichtsrat: Patric Fedlmeier (Vorsitzender) . Klaus Jäger . Jürgen Schütz

Diese E-Mail einschließlich evtl. beigefügter Dateien enthält vertrauliche 
und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige 
Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie 
bitte sofort den Absender und löschen Sie diese E-Mail und evtl. beigefügter 
Dateien umgehend. Das unerlaubte Kopieren, Nutzen oder Öffnen evtl. beigefügter 
Dateien sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser E-Mail ist nicht gestattet.

Am 17.10.2014 um 13:04 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>:

> Hi guys,
> 
> just browsed the git workflow Andy wrote
> (http://tomee.staging.apache.org/dev/source-code.html) and I have a
> few question:
> 1) (more a surprise than anything else) we don't discuss it?
> 2) I find it overcomplicated - this develop branch thing. Today we are
> not big enough to need it IMHO and we are agile enough to change when
> we'll need this. It is great if we would like to rewrite the history
> but we are open source and I think it is important to not do it.
> 3) if we really use it it means release preparation will take one
> extra day - to not say a week - to merge properly from develop to
> master but I don't see the gain
> 4) ds doesn't use it and project goes well so what do we expect? ->
> https://deltaspike.apache.org/suggested-git-workflows.html
> 
> any inputs?
> 
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to