3 ms·
Yes. At work we've got several small teams (sometimes just one person), and each work on their own branches (basically, there's release branches and branches wi
by timtrueman 18y ago
Yes. At work we've got several small teams (sometimes just one person), and each work on their own branches (basically, there's release branches and branches with shared content too). With a single team or just a handful of people this may seem crazy but honestly not branching often just doesn't scale well beyond a certain number of engineers. So you're right, for a small team it may not be worth it. Yeah it's easy to lean across the table and tell your cofounder they broke the build but I'd still say it's a good habit, since you can always launch versioned code and not include any unfinished features (and potential security holes).
- LogicHoleFlaw 18y agoAt work here we have separate branches for each major feature release under parallel development. There's another branch for any high-priority fixes going into production outside of the normal release schedule. There's a lot of merging going on cross-branch and git would make this whole structure much easier to follow. We're using CVS and honestly it's a huge pain for our workflow.