On 13 May 2014 18:39, Mike Alexander <[email protected]> wrote: > ... > In the other direction, I think that once a topic branch is merged to master > it should be abandoned (unless it is used to fix bugs in the stuff that was > just merged). A new topic branch should be created for subsequent changes, > even if they are related to the changes that were just merged (such as the > same changes to a different part of the code). I'm not sure if this is what > you're suggesting or not, but it would seem to avoid a ladder appearance (if > I know what you mean by that).
Working with git in the past I have considered that topic branches should be as short lived as possible. A piece of work should be broken into a number of self contained chunks and each one done on a branch, merged back to trunk, and left. The next chunk being started on a new branch. Of course this is not always possible as sometimes major changes are required which must all be done before the s/w reaches a new consistent state. In that case merging will always be tricky. Colin _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
