Version control tools are supposed to assist in branching/merging more than anything else.
Github forking updating
This avoids losing information about the historical existence of a feature branch and groups together all commits that together added the feature.
Compare: In the latter case, it is impossible to see from the Git history which of the commit objects together have implemented a feature—you would have to manually read all the log messages. a group of commits), is a true headache in the latter situation, whereas it is easily done if the Release branches support preparation of a new production release.
For example, in CVS/Subversion books, branching and merging is first discussed in the later chapters (for advanced users), while in every Git book, it’s already covered in chapter 3 (basics).
As a consequence of its simplicity and repetitive nature, branching and merging are no longer something to be afraid of.
So we branch off and give the release branch a name reflecting the new version number: files change.) Then, the bumped version number is committed.
This new branch may exist there for a while, until the release may be rolled out definitely.
They allow for last-minute dotting of i’s and crossing t’s.
Furthermore, they allow for minor bug fixes and preparing meta-data for a release (version number, build dates, etc.).
”) and something you only do every once in a while.
But with Git, these actions are extremely cheap and simple, and they are considered one of the core parts of your workflow, really.
When the source code in the , our development model uses a variety of supporting branches to aid parallel development between team members, ease tracking of features, prepare for production releases and to assist in quickly fixing live production problems.