For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
Alexandro Martinez -
Maame Afia Fordjour -
Anurag Gupta -
dev.to staff -
Top comments (67)
Personally — I rarely branch off of
mainwhile 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
mainunless 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:)
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
mainwith 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
mainvsdevin 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 statusgit diffqgit add .git commit -m Updategit push -u origin maingit rebase -i HEAD~10rewordrewordrewordsquashsquashsquashgit push -fFor 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
gitgoodI stay in the middle ground between using git improperly and using git how I use at work.
I have a
mainbranch that have the latest working code, adevbranch with stuff I working on actively and every now and then I have a feature-specific branch that I may or may not merge intodevormain, mostly used to try new things without actually messing with working code.I use git on almost all of my projects. And I get sloppy compared to my work git usage. But the main goal with these personal git repositories is that I could use
git bisectto find a breaking change. The commit messages are very useful, but it requires more discipline than I'm often bringing for my persona repositories.I usually work from two different computers, so primarily it's a way to keep all my code nice synced.
I'll create a new branch occasionally, mostly when I'm just experimenting with new design of functionality.
It saves my butt once in a while when I delete something I shouldn't have, or need to reference some file history.
And that's about it. I haven't had a shared Git project in years. Could use some help though, that would be nice!
However, I use Github endlessly. It's where I keep countless project notes, whether it be development related, business related, or product ideas. It's a pretty darn good place to store all that stuff.
That's what I got. 🤷♀️
I sort of got addicted to git flow and conventional commits.
So, it is feature branches and
feat:, chore:, style:for me.But, my old projects have been committing to:
masterand keeping my commit messages: Imperative and <50 characters in lengthI don't really branch from
masterat all when working on my own and do a lot of force-pushing. I attempt to do force-pushes within ca. 10 minutes of the first commit that would be replaced to reduce the chance of any random person cloning the repo in that precise moment to something reasonably low.As for commit messages, I usually don't write more than the first line and occasionally add a paragraph explaining my rationale if it isn't obvious from the change itself.