He/Him/His
I'm a Software Engineer and a teacher.
There's no feeling quite like the one you get when you watch someone's eyes light up learning something they didn't know.
I generally don't branch off main unless I'm doing a long and fairly involved feature. Mainly so it should be easy to throw the work away if it turns out to be too hard or too long to keep working on.
I second you Ben. I do maintain some quality commit messages following the conventional commit. That would help me in future track what went wrong and on which commit rather than scratching my head for an hour or two
For solo projects, I use git as a journal using meaningful commit messages and to mark "save points" where I know the code is working fine. I use git tags as a memorable way to mark the aforementioned good commits. I do not make as much use of branches as I should because it is easy to checkout to a safe commit using tags.
I never know what to write in these things. I should probably spend some time coming up with some snippets about me. I am not new to front end coding, but I am severely rusty.
You're saying this as if it's a feature. In projects I work on, they could be released/deployed almost at any time (at a minimum they are deployable to a testing/demo server), and if the tip of the branch happens to not be, we can easily deploy/release a version from a few commits earlier. Tag it and call it a day. I don't get that "merge dev to master" process.
Are you really saying your dev branch can at times be in a state where you'd say about it: "oh yes, this is currently entirely broken, but don't worry, we'll fix it in time for the scheduled release"?
Dev is not totally unstable! It's yet not ready for production. All internal phases (dev, test, regression) will be carried out here and finally will be merged into stable branch (name as per your preference)
Graduated in Digital Media M.Sc. now developing the next generation of educational software. Since a while I develop full stack in Javascript using Meteor. Love fitness and Muay Thai after work.
I use git for organizational purposes when working solo. I don't really stem off the main branch, but the commenting and commit notes help to keep my multiple projects organized and remind me where I was when I last left off. Overall, I think it's good practice to practice how you would work in a team environment, so I do not do sloppy messages when committing.
For consistency's sake, I try to mirror what I do at work (practice makes perfect and all that) other than maybe branching. Gotta make more commits for that sweet sweet dark green block on my activity graph :)
I haven't heard about tags though, I'm definitely gonna have to check it out! Still got to git good
Top comments (67)
Personally — I rarely branch off of
main
while working solo, but I do maintain high standards of committing regularly with good messages.That's high level, but would love to hear a few more detailed answers from folks!
I generally don't branch off
main
unless I'm doing a long and fairly involved feature. Mainly so it should be easy to throw the work away if it turns out to be too hard or too long to keep working on.I second you Ben. I do maintain some quality commit messages following the conventional commit. That would help me in future track what went wrong and on which commit rather than scratching my head for an hour or two
I also branch off on very few occasion when working solo, but I use tags.
I do the same. But I started to create branches to be committed to releasing a new version to myself 😅. So doesn't feel like an endless project 😆
pretty much the same
Same for me - using it essentially in the same way but rarely using other branches than master.
For solo projects, I use git as a journal using meaningful commit messages and to mark "save points" where I know the code is working fine. I use git tags as a memorable way to mark the aforementioned good commits. I do not make as much use of branches as I should because it is easy to checkout to a safe commit using tags.
Interesting usage, I will definitely adopt this. Quite a handy debugging method especially for side projects.
lots of commits to
main
with messages like “changes” and “more changes”70% "fix"
25% "added [thing]"
5% random rambling
100% useless to anyone but me
2:00am - “saving here to continue tomorrow”
10:00am - “done”
6:00pm - “mobile styling done”
6:01pm - “oops forgot something”
… etc
I always make a main, and a dev branch.
I fork the dev branch in many feature/* branches that I merge to the dev.
Heavy usage of "gitu" alias to push to remotes and mirrors.
and when I need add modification to previous commit.
And I try to write good commit messages following Angular conventions.
When I'm satisfied with my work I tag it (for further fast version reverse).
In case I need to revert bad changes that went into main branch(production)
What about you?!
I really don't get that
main
vsdev
in git-flow.Ongoing development features branches will be merged to dev regularly and dev will be merged to main when dev becomes stable and mergable.
That doesn't explain (and even less so justify) why you do it.
Also, does that mean that dev is not always in a releasable state?
Yes, dev is unstable !
You're saying this as if it's a feature. In projects I work on, they could be released/deployed almost at any time (at a minimum they are deployable to a testing/demo server), and if the tip of the branch happens to not be, we can easily deploy/release a version from a few commits earlier. Tag it and call it a day. I don't get that "merge dev to master" process.
Are you really saying your dev branch can at times be in a state where you'd say about it: "oh yes, this is currently entirely broken, but don't worry, we'll fix it in time for the scheduled release"?
Dev is not totally unstable! It's yet not ready for production. All internal phases (dev, test, regression) will be carried out here and finally will be merged into stable branch (name as per your preference)
Yes, for several reasons:
I use git for organizational purposes when working solo. I don't really stem off the main branch, but the commenting and commit notes help to keep my multiple projects organized and remind me where I was when I last left off. Overall, I think it's good practice to practice how you would work in a team environment, so I do not do sloppy messages when committing.
I build out fantastic CI/CD processes for features branches and pull requests, then ignore them and commit straight to main.
git status
git diff
q
git add .
git commit -m Update
git push -u origin main
git rebase -i HEAD~10
reword
reword
reword
squash
squash
squash
git push -f
For consistency's sake, I try to mirror what I do at work (practice makes perfect and all that) other than maybe branching. Gotta make more commits for that sweet sweet dark green block on my activity graph :)
I haven't heard about tags though, I'm definitely gonna have to check it out! Still got to
git
good