Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.003 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; '16,': 0.03; 'subject:: [': 0.04; 'say,': 0.05; 'subject:Question': 0.07; 'appropriate.': 0.09; 'experimental': 0.09; 'git': 0.09; 'refresh': 0.09; '>>': 0.16; '(normally': 0.16; 'clone': 0.16; 'happy,': 0.16; 'personally,': 0.16; 'prototype,': 0.16; 'redundant.': 0.16; 'subject:branches': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'working.': 0.19; 'subject:] ': 0.20; '>>>': 0.22; 'comfortable': 0.22; '>>>': 0.24; 'directory.': 0.24; 'merge': 0.24; 'tend': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; '>': 0.26; 'push': 0.26; 'switch': 0.26; 'task': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'chris': 0.29; 'feature': 0.29; 'tim': 0.29; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; '(which': 0.31; 'branches': 0.31; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'encouraged': 0.31; 'sep': 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'entirely': 0.33; 'to:name:python-list': 0.33; 'advice': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'should': 0.36; 'operating': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'skip:& 10': 0.38; 'branch': 0.38; 'depends': 0.38; 'tasks': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'rather': 0.38; 'little': 0.38; 'explain': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'either': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'easy': 0.60; 'then,': 0.60; "you're": 0.61; "you'll": 0.62; 'central': 0.64; 'pick': 0.64; 'different': 0.65; 'between': 0.67; 'to,': 0.72; 'listening': 0.74; 'etc,': 0.84 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=V4w3UvPEw3CoBRR5cULhAiFK+B+K1dCJUPnujyg0kr8=; b=zDIj6EdD5tgL4u2VzWQd5j8Zy4ou+WlqCPqVz/3FwupiMQnZzRmGcS9zv/PPd7CHts JdpXL69Zzu0rEEsSDe0MbtfhggBq0l/1wQdnA6GirjQ/oZ2l7CjXYVd/LDI95TZudWay /66v4DVa60iPI6PG4L13RYGGuabG+XfnsB00mDHhVEbDil89VN6mzuxoqibfCfK9Na14 rjVL+wijZLZZHU+bpApVLibv3zWDpycZaG6B+BQEaRZEh87aUqDwHpynsX1S+6a9qdJs o0Cy6GmzeWuNfjESuO1B8no3FiBU/ChctWE1hN6KyG0vxwKs65fWyHmlUgdOpxDMXt8a qMKg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.103.198 with SMTP id fy6mr11613011oeb.6.1410871819885; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 05:50:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <541829b4$0$29995$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <878ulk7z7y.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <541829b4$0$29995$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:50:19 +1000 Subject: Re: [OT] Question about Git branches From: Tim Delaney To: Python-List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011831f2a5e4c305032e31b9 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 99 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1410871828 news.xs4all.nl 2923 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:41792 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:77933 --089e011831f2a5e4c305032e31b9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 16 September 2014 22:14, Steven D'Aprano < steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: > Chris Angelico wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Marko Rauhamaa > wrote: > >> "Frank Millman" : > >> > >>> You are encouraged to make liberal use of 'branches', > >> > >> Personally, I only use forks, IOW, "git clone". I encourage that > >> practice. Then, there is little need for "git checkout". Instead, I just > >> cd to a different directory. > >> > >> Branches and clones are highly analogous processwise; I would go so far > >> as to say that they are redundant. > > > > But rather than listening to, shall we say, *strange* advice like > > this, Frank, you'll do well to pick up a reliable git tutorial, which > > should explain branches, commits, the working tree, etc, etc, etc. > > Isn't this "strange advice" standard operating procedure in Mercurial? I'm > not an expert on either hg or git, but if I've understood hg correctly, the > way to begin an experimental branch is to use hg clone. It depends entirely on how you're comfortable working. I tend to have a clone per feature branch (they all push to the same central repo) and then create a named branch per task (which may be a prototype, bugfix, enhancement, whatever). Makes it very easy to switch between tasks - I just update to a different changeset (normally the tip of a named branch) and force a refresh in my IDE. When I'm happy, I merge into the feature branch, then pull the necessary changesets into other feature branch repos to merge/graft as appropriate. Branches and clones are two different ways of organising, and I find that things work best for me when I use both. Tim Delaney --089e011831f2a5e4c305032e31b9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 1= 6 September 2014 22:14, Steven D'Aprano <steve+co= mp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
>> "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com>:
>>
>>> You are encouraged to make liberal use of 'branches',<= br> >>
>> Personally, I only use forks, IOW, "git clone". I encour= age that
>> practice. Then, there is little need for "git checkout".= Instead, I just
>> cd to a different directory.
>>
>> Branches and clones are highly analogous processwise; I would go s= o far
>> as to say that they are redundant.
>
> But rather than listening to, shall we say, *s= trange* advice like
> this, Frank, you'll do well to pick up a reliable git tutorial, wh= ich
> should explain branches, commits, the working tree, etc, etc, etc.

Isn't this "strange advice" standard operating procedu= re in Mercurial? I'm
not an expert on either hg or git, but if I've understood hg correctly,= the
way to begin an experimental branch is to use hg clone.
It depends entirely on how you're comfortable working. I t= end to have a clone per feature branch (they all push to the same central r= epo) and then create a named branch per task (which may be a prototype, bug= fix, enhancement, whatever).

Makes it very easy to= switch between tasks - I just update to a different changeset (normally th= e tip of a named branch) and force a refresh in my IDE. When I'm happy,= I merge into the feature branch, then pull the necessary changesets into o= ther feature branch repos to merge/graft as appropriate.

Branches and clones are two different ways of organising, and I find= that things work best for me when I use both.

Tim= Delaney=C2=A0
--089e011831f2a5e4c305032e31b9--