On Sat, 2013-06-01 at 16:35 -0400, W. Trevor King wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 12:48:13PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: > > I've updated my rewrite with the other changes to master since I did > > started the rewrite branch. Some commits were just cherry-picked > > across, some needed minor editing to suit. > > In other projects I'm involved in, the preferred approach is to rebase > the feature branch onto the current master. The problem with cherry > picking master advances onto your feature branch is that anyone else > with feature branches based on the current master will have to rebase > *their* feature branches to keep up with your branch. If the person > proposing the changes does the rebasing, that's only a single branch > that has to be rebased, which scales better ;). > > Cheers, > Trevor >
I didn't realize that. I can throw <some> blame towards Jorge who asked me to update my branch with the master additions. Well they weren't that tough, so I should be able to redo it. But my rewrite is more than just a feature. I am restructuring the entire code base. And the more my branch diverges the harder it gets to constantly rebase... It's stuff like this that I hate working in side branches :/ while development continues in the master. At some point, the decision has to be made to switch development, just maintain the old with needed bug fixes in a renamed side branch. Port the bug fixes that still apply to the new development branch. -- Brian Dolbec <[email protected]>
