Thanks, Jed.
Just in case anyone has any thoughts, ideas, experience along this
direction...
We have multiple internal library projects, lib1, lib2,...., and then
multiple applications, app1, app2, app3, all in different repos, and we
are trying to come up with a branching/merging strategy that gives the
best compromise between stability and agility.
Thx.....John
On 11/2/15 2:54 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
JR Cary <[email protected]> writes:
Oh. Good thing that workflow is called "simplified" or
I might not have known!
;-)
gitworkflows(7) also discusses a true throw-away branch called "pu"
(proposed updates) that is convenient for some projects, but difficult
to manage with decentralized integration (multiple integrators versus a
single integrator at the top) and complicated to explain to
user/developers wondering what branch to use if they want to try the
bleeding edge.
