I'm aware that you may be referring to exactly the way I do it - are you? In that case, this would be to clean up your dev branches from local after checking out, is that right? Enter the command git branch -delete Alternatively, you can use a. In all of my 1 man projects I do it like that, if there's a team ( >1 ), I like to do the "diaspora" workflow I linked to. Step 4 Delete the Branch Locally Open the Command Window from the Git repository root. Personally I may have master, development, and if I really must, a "messing around" branch.
#Github desktop delete local branch code
Nevertheless, I'm interested in how different people code in their own ways. Not misenterpreting, rather we just have a different workflow, ( a branch per issue if you would like to think at it like that). very large teams - of maybe 15 - 30+ developers would have many branches to be reconciled, but this post states distinctly local work (so I assume, it's on one man's machine, or am I misinterpreting? This could work for a solo project, but on a 2+ man team, this would not work as well. Sill question, maybe, but why not just work with 2, 3 or 4 if you really must branches? There's a post from my friend here: =EnriqueVidal that lets you remove remote branches that have been merged to master, so you can keep things neat on the remote side as well. Also it is useless to keep a 3 month old branch if it has been merged to master or no longer relevant.
Most if not all the time, we simply forget or don't care to remove those development branches from our local repository, and thus can take up hard drive space. In short, we create a develpment branch for every issue/bug we want to work on, and then merge into master. This guide over here: it is essentially what we do. I've worked on 2 different companies since I've used Git to manage development for projects.
It is interesting to know how other people deal with complexity and how teams manage branches.
0 kommentar(er)
