• mta`chrono (3/3) Jul 29 2012 Have you seen this? What do you think of it? Maybe we'll use this model
• Brad Anderson (5/9) Jul 29 2012 I use it every day at work and love it. I've shared it a couple
• Guillaume Chatelet (2/3) Jul 29 2012 +1
• Russel Winder (21/30) Jul 29 2012 I don't really see the advantage of separating develop and master.
• Brad Anderson (16/25) Jul 30 2012 master isn't strictly necessary since everything is tagged anyway. It j...
• Jacob Carlborg (6/9) Jul 29 2012 Yes, please. We badly need at least something better than we have now.

mta`chrono <chrono mta-international.net> writes:

Have you seen this? What do you think of it? Maybe we'll use this model
in our company in nearest future.

http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

"Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net> writes:

On Sunday, 29 July 2012 at 20:24:42 UTC, mta`chrono wrote:
 Have you seen this? What do you think of it? Maybe we'll use 
 this model
 in our company in nearest future.

 http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

I use it every day at work and love it. I've shared it a couple 
of times on this NG but it doesn't seem to attract much attention.

Regards,
Brad Anderson

Guillaume Chatelet <chatelet.guillaume gmail.com> writes:

On 07/29/12 22:36, Brad Anderson wrote:
 I use it every day at work and love it.

+1

Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk> writes:

On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 22:36 +0200, Brad Anderson wrote:
 On Sunday, 29 July 2012 at 20:24:42 UTC, mta`chrono wrote:
 Have you seen this? What do you think of it? Maybe we'll use=20
 this model
 in our company in nearest future.

 http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

=20
 I use it every day at work and love it. I've shared it a couple=20
 of times on this NG but it doesn't seem to attract much attention.

I don't really see the advantage of separating develop and master.

And personally I am not a great fan of having feature branches in the
mainline repository.

There is a lot about the document and the ideas that are good, but I
don't follow the whole model. For me master is the development branch =E2=
=80=93
and if using continuous delivery can always be branched and released.
All major and minor releases have separate maintenance branches. with
bugfix releases being tags on that.  This seems enough, I am not sure of
the usefulness of anything more complex. But I may be missing something.
--=20
Russel.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n=
et
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

Brad Anderson <eco gnuk.net> writes:

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Russel Winder <russel winder.org.uk>wrote=
:

 I don't really see the advantage of separating develop and master.

master isn't strictly necessary since everything is tagged anyway.  It just
serves as a nice way to see the current release's source code (a pointer to
the latest release). You could just use "master" in place of "develop" and
have a "production" branch fill the role that "master" does in this model
just as easily.


 And personally I am not a great fan of having feature branches in the
 mainline repository.

They aren't in this model. If you need to share a feature branch with
someone else prior to a pull request they can just pull from your branch on
GitHub directly.


 There is a lot about the document and the ideas that are good, but I
 don't follow the whole model. For me master is the development branch =96
 and if using continuous delivery can always be branched and released.
 All major and minor releases have separate maintenance branches. with
 bugfix releases being tags on that.  This seems enough, I am not sure of
 the usefulness of anything more complex. But I may be missing something.

It can be modified to fit whatever the need is, of course, but there is a
lot of value in how well it is documented.  Any changes made or alternative
models used should be well documented too to lower the barrier to entry for
contributors. Everyone needs to be working from the same mental model.

Regards,
Brad Anderson

Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:

On 2012-07-29 22:24, mta`chrono wrote:
 Have you seen this? What do you think of it? Maybe we'll use this model
 in our company in nearest future.

 http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/

Yes, please. We badly need at least something better than we have now. 
Don't know if it exactly need to be this model, but something needs to 
change.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg