4 ms·
Have you tried synchronizing three disparate feature branches this way? I don't think it's really possible. We had a very bad experience trying to do that. The
by WHATDOESIT 4y ago
Have you tried synchronizing three disparate feature branches this way? I don't think it's really possible. We had a very bad experience trying to do that.
The thing is, I want my developers to code, not talk all the time about what/where they would like to code and that the others have to wait until they're finished or suck up the merge conflicts if there's no time. Some communication is always necessary - but this solution with feature branches requires constant communication and still, the developers would rather wait that try to synchronize this way.
- JimmieMcnulty 4y agoWhat? It’s trivial to keep these branches in sync… The more you comment, the more it’s clear you work with a bunch of coders who want to “go dark”, and there are a ton of problems with that. Don’t go dark.
- WHATDOESIT 4y agoNobody wanted to go dark :-D each of us was an unpaid co-founder. Going dark looks very different from what was happening there - each of these guys just wanted to ship code so we make money, ASAP. Well it wasn't trivial at that stage of our development. It became much more trivial once we and the market were happy with our product-market fit and at that point we indeed started with feature branches again. Now I'm working at a consultancy and since there's much more time for everything, we are doing feature branches during our MVP development too. But there's a stark difference in velocity this current team and the team I told you about achieved.
- JimmieMcnulty 4y agoYou're not using the correct terminology to describe what you were doing...