4 ms·
Very good comparison between workflows of deploying several times per day versus much less often. While it might not be obvious to some, the exact same git "flo
by Pewpewarrows 15y ago
Very good comparison between workflows of deploying several times per day versus much less often. While it might not be obvious to some, the exact same git "flow" won't work for both. Your tools should complement your corporate culture, not the other way around.
I think the most important thing to note from either method, though, is not to develop on master/trunk. Have a separate branch, or further branches off an entire "develop" branch. The tip of master should always be a stable build.
- dasil003 15y agoYes, however the only factor here that implies never working off master is the peer review. If one dev can take responsibility for the stability of a patch, then it's perfectly okay to work off of master locally and push when it's stable. If you need to put this work on hold or it grows into something requiring a topic branch, at any time you can simply do: git branch new_topic_branch && git reset --hard origin/master
- scorpion032 15y agoI typically use master for developing, and another branch called "production" to store whats live.