4 ms·
It's sometimes very useful, but not that often. It's not great for short lived feature branches. It's for long-term branches. If you don't need those (and most
by 1wd 10y ago
It's sometimes very useful, but not that often. It's not great for short lived feature branches. It's for long-term branches. If you don't need those (and most often you do not): great, your life is (relatively) simple; don't over-complicate it. You don't buy the use-case, because the situation is not that common or desirable. But once you get in a situation where you really do need multiple long-term branches developed in parallel, you might be happy to have a tool that helps untangle the web of merges somewhat.
- justinlaster 10y ago>It's for long-term branches. Please elaborate how this helps you in long-term branches, instead of just assuming long-term branches aren't something most people deal with on a daily basis. >you might be happy to have a tool that helps untangle the web of merges somewhat. This has no relation to long-term branches, this happens with any kind of normal history, and even shared history between repositories (which is a far messier thing to untangle). Yet this feature is unneeded, because the information can be correctly found within git in an accurate and not misleading fashion.