Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Prochazka, Jan wrote: > However, I also think that this behavior is quite problematic. We > started to use different branch per different developer group to > separate changes from each others and did merge to head to create the > release only. But because the trouble with empty changes we could not > use it as it was virtually impossible to track down the changes. In that case you're only merging once maybe once a month, and everything works as intended - there is no problem with this and it works well. > The same thing if somebody use branches eg. to separate work on > particular bug/features and needs to update from HEAD until the branch > is closed. This case is merge in a single direction and is a normal way of working - I do it quite a lot myself. There is no issue with this. > We now create new branch after each merge branch to HEAD. That reduced That's completely unnecessary. Where you get problems is if you're trying to merge two branches bidirectionally as it creates a lot of revisions for the merges (in this case though there probably isn't a point in having both branches and it'd be better justto have one). OTOH you should not be assigning any significance to revision numbers *at all* so having a few extra revisions isn't really an issue. Tony