Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
@beegC0de yes that is much smarter :/ but if I do that, hashes of commits will not match with master, even if count is same
-
@zemaitis if you do 10 commits on top of master in your develop branch, squash them into one commit on your develop branch, then merge into master, it will just be a fast forward which the two branches will then have all same commits
-
@Santaclauze sorry, but what did you mean by pushing to master is a no no?
-
I prefare to rebase my dev branch (git checkout devbranch && git rebase master) and then merge it to master (git checkout master && git merge devbranch). It's most of the time more clean I think but conflicts can be nasty. Best is to rebase often while developing to always be as close to the master as possible
-
@ShotgunSurgeon oh and for squashing I rebase onto master first then squash on the devbranch and then merge into master
-
Why do you need to create a pr from development branch after squash merging them in master?
Are you doing git flow?
I always consider my feature braches closed after merge. They have done their duty. I would work on a feature brach, squash its commit to one, and then merge the feature branch to develop. The feature would then go to the master by merging develop into master. (Details change if you have release branches as well.) All merges should be fast forwards.
when your code is a mess but everything work out in the end
When you keep getting +1s on a rant you posted a month ago.
Go big or go home.
Question about git. I worked on dev branch and made 10 commits.
Then I squash merged 10 commits from develop to master and made a release build.
Now problem is if I make a pull request from develop to master bitbucket will still show that master is behind (because develop has fixes in 10 commits while master has all of them squashed in 1 commit).
Now my question is whats the best way to make sure master and develop are synced (basically that master would have everything what develop has) ?
should I just merge master into develop back after the release?
rant
question