- Why aren't you using git-flow? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1617425
- Ask HN: What's your dev teams git multi-environment setup workflow like? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1738934
- Our Git Workflow: Private Development, Public Releases (at Braintree): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1611667
- My Git Workflow (Michael Ivey): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=441670
- My Common Git Workflow (Yehuda Katz): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1343753
- Git Workflow for Agile Teams: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=624319
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1063198 <- This one has comments
The added hassle of memorizing shell commands (and opening a command prompt every time you want to commit) are just not worth any incremental benefit that Git might provide. I'm happy using SVN because it's got good tools. Surely there's an equivalent for Git?
I haven't used it, but there is a tortoisegit project: http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/
Anyone know the status of EGit? I can't download source or binaries; it looks like the server has been down for a couple weeks. http://www.eclipse.org/egit/
I find that the workflow using this tool fits me better than with tortoise, mostly because it is repo-centric, instead of working on the explorer.
Assuming that a release-1.2.1 branch existed and a hotfix was needed, what would the the hotfix be versioned as? 1.2a? 1.2.1a? 1.2.1 and then bump the release to 1.2.2?
I've used both git & p4 for a while and know their ins & outs, but would love to know if anybody has any suggestions for the crossover. My X-importing-to-Y experience has been limited to svn-to-git, svn-to-hg, and hg-to-git.
I dare you to implement a compiler with only stuff invented since January 6, 2010. Or do basically anything (including eat). Eventually, we'll pity you and bring you antibiotics and parsing algorithms.
Replacing your best practices/processes every couple months to keep up with the latest trends is a recipe for disaster in any multi-person development environment and change breeds confusion.
That said this setup won't work for everyone nor does the author claim it should do. It's another possible tool for your belt to consider depending on your work and the team you're working with.
I guess the to short version is don't be so quick to dismiss things based off age(or lack thereof in this case) unless you can dismiss it with a proven replacement.
You should not however be so quick in concluding that I said to dismiss the article. I am nearly bringing attention to the fact that it is nearly a year old and to consider it while making your own evaluation of the article.
Side note: I think the reason your previous comments were down voted wasn't your concern about the age of the article so much as your lack of a better alternative. If you could say "This was from Jan and this has been shown to be better" people would probably be posting stories about your new technique. To just say it is 10 months old though adds nothing to the conversation.