5 ms·
You should, or do you just merge updated remote branches into your stale local branches? A lot of new developers seem to do that here until we explain to them h
by aeyes 6y ago
You should, or do you just merge updated remote branches into your stale local branches? A lot of new developers seem to do that here until we explain to them how it messes up the history.
- Supermancho 6y ago> do you just merge updated remote branches into your stale local branches? Every single developer I work with (or have in the last 8 years) does this. "Messes up the history" ? The merge commit describes that there are uptaken changes from the "main" branch. It doesn't seem to be a problem in practice.
- KptMarchewa 6y agoIt's also not a problem for me, because I squash the commits on merge to master or other remote branch.
- recursive 6y agoI've been doing that for years, and it's never messed up the history.
- secondcoming 6y agoWe don't merge one-off branches into other one-off branches unless they're all under the same feature. Everything goes via develop when they're complete, and new one-off branches are created from develop. When we release to production, develop gets merged to master. We consider a 'feature' a large piece of work that will take several weeks, during which time several releases to production may be done for other work/tickets.