4 ms·
Basically they took the easy way out of just pushing code to the master and letting the consumers worry about consequences instead of fixing the actual problem
by petetnt 9y ago
Basically they took the easy way out of just pushing code to the master and letting the consumers worry about consequences instead of fixing the actual problem (which was long living branches caused by other underlying issues with general processes). Not really a huge fan of that.
- nine_k 9y agoNothing prevents you from having a constantly synced "master" branch and a carefully curated "release" branch. Nothing, except the effort required for curating. But between that and the pain of having several long-running parallel dev branches that tend to diverge, cross-pollinate in weird ways, have hard time merging to the production branch, etc, my choice is obvious.