I think we have a language difference: when I say "merging" I don't mean, "incorporate changes from trunk" I mean "you branch and trunk become the same". > get

I think we have a language difference: when I say "merging" I don't mean, "incorporate changes from trunk" I mean "you branch and trunk become the same". > getting to integrate on your own schedule Essentially, this is what I oppose, for the reasons I described originally. > Any other workflow is limiting and restricting many of the benefits of git. The point of git is to make your workflow better, the point of your workflow is not to make git better. Yeah "branching is easy", and that's good, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you want to start using branches heavily (especially long-lived ones). Bad version control systems were only part of the reason to avoid branches.