4 ms·
The big advantage of branches is to allow to break your commits into smaller things. When working on two new features which takes many commits, if you work on t
by cdavid 17y ago
The big advantage of branches is to allow to break your commits into smaller things. When working on two new features which takes many commits, if you work on the same branch, the history becomes inter winded, and that's a nightmare to understand if you need to go back (or find regression). With branches that are pulled into a public reference branch, you are guaranteed to get a workable, coherent and consistent state. Without branches, what happens is either broken trunk or giant commits, both often worse than the (real) complexity brought by branch.
The fact that DVCS allows for less rigid management alo explains why DVCS became popular so quickly in open source, I think (where the kind of collaboration managements you suggest does not scale very well).
- axod 17y ago> "Without branches, what happens is either broken trunk or giant commits, both often worse than the (real) complexity brought by branch." Or you do your development in a way that doesn't break the build, and do it in several steps. For example, just build new code that can be specified to be used at runtime, then when it works just like the existing default code, switch it over (Effectively doing your own branch).
- DannoHung 17y agoDude, you're talking about expending extra effort and thought to be able to do something cleanly which the new tool lets you do effortlessly and mindlessly all to avoid something that the new tool is EXCELLENT at.