Hi William,
Would you simply revert master back to known working state and merge the
feature branch back in at a later date when its fixed and working?
(Wondering if doing something like that messes with the history and causes
problems down the line when merging feature branches into
I've been reading about git-flow and doing some experiments, and though I
am no expert with it yet, I think its a good tool for these types of
scenarios. I have not tried this with the team yet but my idea would be to
use git-flow to create a feature branch locally and push that branch up to
Hello Chen,
it is really a big problem when we have tasks that depends on other tasks.
To avoid this, our PO try to select tasks that don't depend on each other
per iteration. In the next iteration, if the task is done (it includes
code-review, test...), the PO selects a task that depends on
Hey all,
Just learning Git and I am trying to understand the best workflow for our
team. For arguments sake, assume we are using Github for
our private repositories and using Heroku for hosting.
I'd like to have a workflow where our development team commits changes to a
development branch.
Hey Bryan,
in my current project, we use feature branch to do our tasks, i.e. for each
task we create a new branch in the main repository and everyone can commit
in this branch. Once the task is completed and approved, we merge the
branch into the main (master) and delete this branch. With this
Hi William.
Thanks for your reply. Havent thought much about bug fixes, but I suppose
they could be done on master directly. Is that what youre doing on your
current project?
Who is responsible for merging a feature branch with master? I'm guessing
there are no restrictions. I think that
