On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:14:28AM -0200, Gordon Freeman wrote: > Hello guys, im Gordon. > > I have a question about workflow with git that i dont know if im doing > it right. > I have 1 repo with 2 branchs the first is the master of the project. > the second is a branch copy of the master but he need to have some > specifc code because is code for a client. > so, every time that i updade master i need to merge master with client > branch and it give me conflicts of course that will hapen. > Well if was just me who work on this 2 branchs it will be easy to fix > the conflicts and let all work and shine. > But whe have here, 10 people woking on master branch and some times code > are lost on merge and we need to look on commits to search whats goin > on. > What i just asking here is if its correct the workflow that i do. If for > some problem like this, the community have a standard resolution. Or if > what im doing here is all wrong.
There are many correct workflows. I personally use the workflow you've mentioned for the exact same reason (customizations for a client), but I'm the only developer on that repository. What you might try instead is a slightly different workflow. Have each developer create a feature branch to add a feature or fix a bug. Merge these into master as they become ready. Have a specific person or group of people be integrators, and have them merge master into the client branch as necessary, fixing up any conflicts. When conflicts are non-trivial, use pair programming or a review process to ensure that the result is good. We use a similar workflow at my regular employer, and it is generally very successful for a department with 45 employees. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
