Comments on: Branching Strategies in Git – Overview

By: New york soho

New york soho — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:30:08 +0000

Allstate – Auto Guarantee Quotes Online – Solemn Locale on Car Bond, Accommodations Guaranty, Financial Products & More Rates and cover options (and their availability) vacillate according to your formal’s regulations.All you have to do is combine your native and auto guarantee with Allstate, and you strength recover up to 20%. Hands down, it’s the easiest speed to shelter a tons of wampum without sacrificing standing protection.

By: adrians's status on Tuesday, 23-Jun-09 11:50:39 UTC - Identi.ca

adrians's status on Tuesday, 23-Jun-09 11:50:39 UTC - Identi.ca — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:50:42 +0000

[...] git branching explained: http://gitguru.com/2009/02/18/branching-strategies-overview/ [...]

By: codeAPE » Blog Archive » Mercurial for subversion users

codeAPE » Blog Archive » Mercurial for subversion users — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:30:06 +0000

[...] http://gitguru.com/2009/02/18/branching-strategies-overview/ – Good description of GIT branching (or branching in general); I’m more used to back mergeing then forward merging. This seems to just merge to the trunck where the trunk is at. Posted in Computers | Leave a Comment [...]

By: George V. Reilly

George V. Reilly — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 23:38:45 +0000

What tool is generating those branch diagrams?

By: long

long — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 05:05:17 +0000

@Guyou-

No matter which way you start (development first or production “first”), you’ll end up with a similar looking branch diagram.
The test and production branch head pointers will always trail development. I’ve put in the “kinks” at the start of test-level and dev-level commits are located to help indicate the lifecycle state. Otherwise it would be a straight line of commits in this ideal case. Since no changes are made directly against the production and test branches, any merges from development to test and from test to production are fast-forwards.

Probably what you’re visualizing is when changes from development are added by cherry-picking onto test (and likewise from test to production). In that case you would have truly separate test and production branches that do start from along the development branch.

By: Guyou

Guyou — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:15:19 +0000

Branches are beautifully explained in this article. I bookmark it for future explainations.

But I don’t like the last diagram. Reading it, we can feel that development branch is based on test branch which is based, in turn, onto production branch. IMHO, development come first, then we branch to fix code, and finally we branch to keep track of production state.

Related to branches, here is a really good article presenting “customers” branches: titled “Never merging back”, http://gitster.livejournal.com/26540.html