Re: Do most people feel tracking branches useful?

["Miles Bader" <miles@gnu.org>]

On Oct 29, 2008 6:58pm, Liu Yubao <yubao.liu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Extremely useful. I usually keep local branches closely synchronized
> > with a remote "central" version, and tracking branches make the frequent
> > push/pull much more convenient.
>
> In my work flow, I don't keep changes in local branch for long time,
> I rebase it regularly and push them to central branch or discard them
> if the upstream rejects.
>
> You are right, I realize tracking branches is useful for people who keeps
> local changes for long time and track the upstream branch at the same
> time.

I don't keep local changes for a long time, I push daily. The local
tracking branch and the corresponding remote branch are basically copies of
each other, in different locations. I also do regularly rebasing, but
against a _different_ remote branch.

There are never merge commits, because all merges done by pull are
fast-forwards. If I were to push changes from multiple working directories
to the central location, I'd have to be more careful about the pull-merging
-- a rebase-on-pull as you suggest would be useful -- but I generally don't.

-Miles
-- 
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.