Hi all, is it possible to avoid merge workflow to have a linear history of commits and avoid the conflicts on the repository ? Here are some articles that explain why Merge Workflow is "bad": http://www.randyfay.com/node/89 http://www.randyfay.com/node/91
Also it's preferable to commit only new "features" in the 'next' branch and leave the master alone. The 'master' branch will only be updated when we'll release a new version of BuC. For me the "best" approach will be: git checkout next # Check out the "next" branch git pull --rebase -p # Get the latest version from remote git checkout -b my_feature # create our own topical branch 'my_feature' Regulary do: git fetch origin # Update your repository's origin/ branches from remote repo git rebase origin/next # Plop our commits on top of everybody else's "next" branch ... # do stuff here.. Make commits.. test... When you are ready to push your modifications: git checkout next # Switch to the local tracking branch git pull --rebase -p # Get the latest version from remote git rebase my_feature # Pull those commits over to the "next" branch git push # Push the "next" branch back up, with my stuff on the top What do you think about that ? Regards, Yves ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
