Re: git commit/push and VC

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Achim Gratz <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 19:17:43 +0100

Thanks for your comments.  A few responses below.

> >   . do we want to explicitly recommend 2 different clones, one each
> >     for master and the release branch? there's nothing in the
> >     instructions about this, or about working with 2 divergent
> >     branches in general
> 
> I've just got a new computer and it takes all of 0.6 seconds to switch
> from master to emacs-24.  I've had a much slower one until two days ago
> and I don't think it took longer than about 5 seconds even there.

You are missing the point.  Switching the branch is easy, but after
that, you'd almost always need a full bootstrap, which might become
annoying.

> Unless you're really working all the time in parallel on both branches
> I'd say this setup is more trouble than it's worth.

I personally am working on both branches in parallel, yes.  Many
others do, too.  Bugfixes go to one branch, new features to the other,
people report bugs on this or other, etc.  Bootstrapping each time,
which takes a couple of minutes, is annoying.  And then you sometimes
want to compare what the two binaries, one from master, the other from
the release branch, do in the same situation.

But that's me, and I already know how to solve this.  I'm asking what,
if anything, do we want to recommend.

> >   . GitQuickStartForEmacsDevs advises to use "git ci -a"; why not
> >     suggest the same in GitForEmacsDevs? it seems a simpler setup
> 
> That is no git command.  Assuming that ci is an alias for commit, then
> no, that is not a good recommendation in general.  If the only changes
> you have belong to a single commit (a quick bugfix, say) then it saves a
> bit of typing.  But if the changes should really be goign to different
> commits for clarity, then this is ill-advised.

We are talking about simplified instructions here, mind you.  Don't
take that as a general advice for advanced users: they don't need
these instructions.