Have you considered using soft links? I think git can store them. So each file 
in folder “final” would be symlinked to one or more other folders.

Jan Høydahl

> 4. nov. 2019 kl. 14:25 skrev Ryan Skraba <[email protected]>:
> 
> To be clear: I have no experience with creating and (_especially_)
> maintaining lab materials, just pointing out that one experience as a
> student with a WET lab.  In the elm workshop, it's
> Write-Everything-Fourteen-Times-(Max)!
> 
> My experience with git and multi-branch workflows (release trains /
> maintenance branches) is to encourage minimizing the number of
> branches currently in play.  It's not that WET is less evil, just that
> I *will* end up cherry-picking to the wrong branch, or merging a PR
> from/to a misconfigured branch, or forgetting to push one of the
> branches, or... etc. etc.   In comparison to a single commit: I can
> verify that the same change was applied three times: to lab4, lab5,
> and lab6 (but not before lab4 because that code didn't apply yet).
> 
> That being said, it's possible that the branch-per-lab is the best fit
> for this use case.  If the Ignite materials are already prepared
> (awesome news), I imagine that incubating is the right time to give it
> a try.  It might also be extra encouraging for other lab creators,
> which would be additional feedback before deciding on "best
> practices"!
> 
> All my best, Ryan
> 
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 10:12 AM Dmitriy Pavlov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Justin, Ryan, thank for your replies.
>> 
>> Do I understand you correctly? WET (actually, not twice, but 4 or 5 or,
>> hopefully in the future, 10+ times) is less evil and all labs should be
>> initially diverged and placed to separate folders?
>> 
>> I also thought about some mixed approach:
>> 
>> I can commit all stuff using initial proposal, and master->lab6->5->4...
>> will be branches during development, but just before release some (for
>> example, gradle) script will checkout labs from supplementary repo and do
>> all copy-paste job.
>> 
>> E.g. git checkout lab 6; copy all stuff -> lab6, checkout lab 5, copy all
>> stuff -> lab5
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> пт, 1 нояб. 2019 г. в 11:25, Justin Mclean <[email protected]>:
>> 
>>> HI,
>>> 
>>>> Hello!  I just wanted to point to a workshop that uses the WET
>>>> strategy: https://github.com/rtfeldman/elm-workshop   Each step of the
>>>> lab is in a different directory, rather than branch.
>>> 
>>> I have to say I like that idea better as it’s clear what the current
>>> version is.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Justin
>>> 
>>> 

Reply via email to