Re: developing a modified Linux-style workflow

[Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@at.or.at>]

On Dec 12, 2010, at 10:31 PM, David Aguilar wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 05:24:16PM -0500, Hans-Christoph Steiner  
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> (and my second post on this list...)
>>
>> I've gotten pretty good at git, and its helping me already with
>> managing the very odd workflows I have with the software I work a
>> lot on called Pd (http://puredata.info).  My role in Pd development
>> is like a Linux lieutenant.
>>
>> I also the main dev for an app called Pd-extended, which is based on
>> Pd.  Now I'm stuck trying to figure out how to use git to match my
>> current workflow for Pd-extended, which is a kind of long-lived
>> branch, almost like a friendly fork.  So its kind of close to the
>> Linux workflow with me as a lieutenant, but not quite.
>>
>> What makes it tricky is that I make releases directly from my repo
>> that are widely used.  So my repo is both lieutenant and dictator at
>> the same time.  So that's where I am stumped.  I want to be able to
>> rebase and push to a public repo, but that would be stupid.  So
>> there has got to be another way.
>
> Have you considered periodically merging Pd into Pd-extended
> as an alternative to rebasing?  It might even be easier to
> manage in the long-term.


The thing I really like about the lieutenant workflow is that I can  
keep my patches at the top of history, and it automatically handles it  
once my patch is handled upstream.  It seems that merging Pd into Pd- 
extended would leave me with a very complicated history.

.hc


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

'You people have such restrictive dress for women,’ she said, hobbling  
away in three inch heels and panty hose to finish out another pink- 
collar temp pool day.  - “Hijab Scene #2", by Mohja Kahf