4 ms·
If they use the common github approach of one fork per contributor, 6,000 repos accumulate quickly.
by cedilla 5y ago
If they use the common github approach of one fork per contributor, 6,000 repos accumulate quickly.
- PUSH_AX 5y agoI've never worked in this way (when I've been part of the org), is it that common? What are the benefits of making everyone fork repos vs branching off the original repo?
- robjan 5y agoI don't think that's a common workflow within companies. In every org I have worked at, forking is explicitly disabled
- MAGZine 5y agoI worked at a large gaming company and that was definitely the collaboration model. Before per-branch controls, the only way to disable write access (while maintaining read access, pull-request privs, etc) to a repository's blessed branches was forks.
- _joel 5y agoIt's common in general open source projects where you might want to send a patch for something that you don't have commit priveleges too, but I've never seen that used in enterprises as they have central auth / groups with the users required to work on the code.
- vultour 5y agoYou don't have 500000 garbage leftover branches on the main repo.