Apologies for bringing up this old thread but being rather new to git and this community, I don't want to step on any toes - but does anyone have a solid example of their typical git workflow?
My typical workflow and setup ( for facter ) at the moment is: Setup - - Clone lak's git repo of facter - Branch to my own dev branch Reoccuring: - Checkout my branch. Branch from my branch into appropriate topic branch (facter_ver/ticket_####) and check that out. - Work on ticket, test, commit to topic branch - Merge ticket back into my dev branch - Rebase my dev branch - Push my dev branch up to github Is this preferrable? Or should I just skip the part of having my own dev branch, branch off the master for each topic branch and then push each topic branch up to my github repo for the maintainer's to pull from? I've just been testing this out, so I haven't setup the commit hooks, emails and such, but any peeks into what other developers' workflows look like would be appreciated. Thanks - - sh On May 25, 1:44 pm, Peter Meier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi > > > At this point, I'd prefer to stick with everyone setting up commits > > for their personal repositories, but then when a commit is being > > considered for merging, it should be sent to -dev. > > I like this idea. So everybody who wants to get the important changes > won't have the noice on the -commit list. As well it might get more > discussed there. > > greets pete --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
