Wouldn't these branches be permanent? They might be fine for translations, but I... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		ciupicri on Oct 10, 2010 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Advanced Git tips (slides) Wouldn't these branches be permanent? They might be fine for translations, but I doubt upstream would accept one for a bug fix. As for bookmarks, if I understand this correctly, I have to convince upstream to use them. With git I can create a branch in my repository and upstream can pull my changes in whatever branch it wishes too. I don't need to convince anyone to do anything else, besides accepting my patches.

tednaleid on Oct 10, 2010 [–]

Sorry, I misunderstood your use case for the bug-fix branch. Yes, you likely wouldn't want a named branch for that.

I use local bookmarks for this. It lets you think of it as a branch locally (it's really a floating tag), but doesn't (automatically) get pushed out.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact