commit - What is the convention for committing ugly code to a git repository? -


my current usage of git described "commit , often". attempt make each commit single logical unit (as discussed in good commit criteria). however, i'm iterating design , wish save each stage. if come ugly functional, want commit checkpoint before cleaning things up.

what experience in matter - has caused issues team? going beyond ugly code - acceptable locally commit broken code long don't push until bugs fixed?

the common convention use feature branch (or set of branches) live in repository - , perhaps somewhere online github or gitorious.

you can rebase , rewrite feature branch reasonable impunity until have ready submit upstream in whatever project-specific way want. allows build, , share, work-in-progress code without headache.

along way, building series of commits, using interactive rebase (or other rewriting tools) turn set of clean, logical commits great way move checkpoints in time checkpoints in functionality - , works best if commit extremely often, , in extremely small parts.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

jasper reports - Fixed header in Excel using JasperReports -

media player - Android: mediaplayer went away with unhandled events -

python - ('The SQL contains 0 parameter markers, but 50 parameters were supplied', 'HY000') or TypeError: 'tuple' object is not callable -