Our team is attempting to implement Git Flow into our routine and we are having a bit of an issue with how best to do this.
We have one "master" repository that we have all cloned from (using Bitbucket). This one we call "upstream" and our own clone we call "origin". We also each create our own local clones from our own origin repository to do our work in.
Currently, once we have completed a feature we push that branch to our origin and the do a PR to upstream from origin/feature -> upstream/master so that the merge into master happens when the PR is accepted. This has worked well since nobody is working directly on the master branch (in theory).
So, my new test setup with Git Flow, I'm using SourceTree locally and when I complete a feature it merges that feature into my local develop branch which is then pushed up to my origin. I then go and create the PR from origin/develop to master/develop.
This is now where I come unstuck. I used to be able to just pull from upstream into my master and all the changes including my own and others would come in nice and cleanly without and dramas. Now, when I pull into develop, I end up with extra merge commits locally in my develop branch which I then have to push when I do my next feature.
I guess what I object to is the extra merge commits I'm getting now where previously there was very few of these required. Is this just something we have to live with using this model or is there a neater way to do it?
Thanks
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.