If I have a master
branch.
I then checkout a work
branch and make awesome changes, and some commits.
Then I have to fix something so I go back to master
and checkout a branch called fix
, fix what I need to do, and merge it into master
.
My question is, should I then merge master
onto work
and continue, or should I continue on work
where I was and merge it when I'm done?
I find myself having to go back to all the branches I work on and updating (merging changes to) each branch.
I get the feeling it's best to merge asap, but then find myself having to continuously update all the branches I work on. Is this unnecessary?
Refer to the always awesome Git Branching Model by Nive:
You see, you should merge fix
(not master
) to the work
(aka develop
) branch.
How often should you merge to master
? Every stable release, of course.
Any other doubts? Look at the picture. :P
Source: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With