On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 07:29:54AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote: > > Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a > > specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done; > > This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feature > developing model. Right now, when you work on a feature, all others > are forced to check it out and test for you. If you use git, your > feature is unlikely to be well tested (if no one else check out your > branch) before merge and bigger merges just increase the chance of > conflict and decrease early review.
[I never thought I might become a git advocate *sigh*, anyway...] There's nothing wrong with treating the centralized repo pretty much the same way as LyX svn trunk is currently treated. You can push your work pretty much in the same chunks as you would today. _On top of that_ you _can_ have branches that are far, far easier to handle than svn branches. I'd even argue that (to come back on this Friday's topic) some of the past losses like the XML branch would not have occured as switching between branches is fast and cheap and people are more likely to "have a quick look". Andre'
