3 ms·
> It contains no one else's code since everyone works on a branch. 100% of everyone else's code that has made it to main. If you need to coordinate more close
by dspillett 3y ago
> It contains no one else's code since everyone works on a branch.
100% of everyone else's code that has made it to main.
If you need to coordinate more closely (i.e. different people working on related changes, which is likely to be common) then the branch doesn't have to be local and just for you, it can be shared, perhaps with individuals having their own local copy of that for quick check-ins¹ without publishing to others until ready². Whether this scales manageably will depend on the project and your team dynamics.
--
[1] to save work state before experimental changes, or just to have an off-machine last-known-good copy (assuming your “local” repo is covered by off-machine backups or is not actually local)
[2] though this indirection adds extra overhead – someone needs to rebase that from main then everyone may need to rebase to bring local copies in line
- mannykannot 3y agoI feel it is likely to scale better than the alternatives, as it is a recursively hierarchical model of a recursively hierarchical problem. It would break if people are committing broken things, but then you have a different and more fundamental problem.