Hi Lukasz,
The naming schema looks good too me. Except the 'branch-xxx' naming of a
branch.
Naming a branch branch-xxx looks useless too me.
But anyway we could start with a master, develop and feature-struts3
branches.
Best Regards
Johannes
#
w
Hey Lukasz & others,
sorry for chiming in a bit late, I'm suffering from heavy workload
currently.
Basically this idea looks quite good and straightforward to me. On the
other hand, kind of a standard, named git-flow, seems to have
established, which I find worth evaluating:
http://nvie.com/post
Am 16.01.14 14:14, schrieb Lukasz Lenart:
> Till we won't decide what flow to use, it's ok to commit directly to
> master branch.
>
... or maybe open some arbitrary feature-branch first?
>
> Regards
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
