[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Shared branch vs single branch

From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 15:45:01 -0500

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:15 PM, BRM <bm_witness_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> If by "single/shared" branch you mean everyone working out of the same
> place...then yes - you'll trip over each other from time to time.

Conflicts are going to happen. The question is more about the timing
- and how your team works (or fights...) together.

> I've worked in both "trunk is prestine" (all work in branches) and "trunk is
> dirty" (all work in trunk) models; when you have multiple people the "trunk
> is prestine" works a lot better, but as others have noted people doing the
> merges have to ensure they are done right - and that includes testing.

If you use 'trunk is dirty', you will also want 'release' branches so
a broken trunk as you make big changes is not a serious problem.

> "Trunk is dirty" won't save you from bad merges, it'll just make more
> conflicts in your working copy as you do updates - something that drove a
> colleague of mine nuts so I started working in my own branch for that
> project. You also have to more frequently be doing "svn update" on your
> working copy to minimize impacts of what others are doing.

Just a matter of whether you want to resolve small conflicts as they
happen with frequent updates/commits (and maybe take advantages of
other's changes sooner rather than later), or do you want to complete
the changes in isolation so you can prove that your version was the
best and should win if there is a conflict?

   Les Mikesell
Received on 2013-09-23 22:45:47 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.