Timeline for Strategy for code review before merge to master from feature branches
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2013 at 19:32 | comment | added | Andrzej Gis | Wish I could accept mode than one answer. A hybrid solution would be ideal. Using rebase and than compare with the branch point seems to be the best way to go. | |
| Oct 16, 2013 at 7:21 | history | edited | Jan Hudec | CC BY-SA 3.0 | minor grammar nit |
| Oct 16, 2013 at 6:58 | comment | added | Michaël Le Barbier | @JanHudec I added a sentence to clarify! | |
| Oct 16, 2013 at 6:58 | history | edited | Michaël Le Barbier | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Clarify branch names |
| Oct 16, 2013 at 5:50 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | @michipili: I understand it. But a random beginner looking for guidance won't. Please, clarify it in the answer itself. | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 19:12 | comment | added | Michaël Le Barbier | @gisek I added a few explanations. I hope it helps! | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 19:11 | history | edited | Michaël Le Barbier | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 610 characters in body |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 19:02 | comment | added | Michaël Le Barbier | @JanHudec At any time, there is only one branch called topic in GIT, it is always one of the branches (a branch as in commit tree, not as in GIT reference) I labelled topic-0, topic-1, topic-2. | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 18:54 | history | edited | Michaël Le Barbier | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Clarify rebasing and branch names |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 18:03 | comment | added | Andrzej Gis | How does it save me from "foreign merges"? What if someone merges to master after I send topic-2 to a teammate and that the teammate reviews it against the tip of the master? | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 11:29 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | The revisions exist and are pointed to by reflog entries. But as branches there is just one, topic. Because branch in git is just the name. | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 11:20 | comment | added | Michaël Le Barbier | The three branches exist, but have no name (no ref). Maybe I should emphasize this. | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 11:18 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | There should be no topic-0, topic-1 and topic-2 branches. The second the rebase is complete, the previous version is irrelevant. So all there would be is topic@{1}, topic@{2}, topic@{yesterday}, topic@{3.days.ago} etc. to save your butt in case you find you screwed conflict resolution in the rebase. | |
| Oct 15, 2013 at 11:15 | history | answered | Michaël Le Barbier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |