CODEWITHSUNDEEP
eclipsegitegit
arynaq
arynaq

Reputation: 6870

Eclipse egit, problems with collaboration & tips

Me and my friend are two days into using Git now but we still lack the know-how to use it properly and utilize its full power though it is a tremendous step in the right direction, compared to using Facebook messages to sending and syncing files. We have searched over the net and most of the guides for Egit either assume you work alone or that someone else clones and branches off to their own repo. However we are collaborating on the same project (a 2D RPG) and don't know how to properly use Egit to work together. Some of the problems we face:

1. We had the exact same copy of the project, he changed some of the methods we used, I changed some of the classes and resources we use. He committed and pushed to repo first. Now I cannot push or commit or even pull because of conflicts in the files (repo vs local) which Egit complains must be resolved.

2. How do you properly synchronize code that you are collaborating on? Lets say either one of us is first out to push to repo, what must the other (the puller) do to make sure his own code is not completely overwritten, only accept parts that have changed, parts that we think should be changed.

3. Do we always have to make a (new) local branch, pull to this, see changes, and merge the changes we want with the master/main? How do you properly do this.

Any input is most welcome, we are already much more efficient with our broken knowledge, more will only do good :)

Upvotes: 1

Views: 784

Answers (1)

j.karlsson
j.karlsson

Reputation: 653

Ok here are my answers:

  1. We had the exact same copy ... because of conflicts in the files (repo vs local) which Egit complains must be resolved.

    • First you should make sure you use separate branches so that you can always commit.
    • Then you have to resolve any conflicts when you merge.

  2. How do you properly synchronize code ...

    • Use separate branches to make sure code is ok before you pull it into master branch.

  3. Do we always have to make a (new) local branch ...

    • Yes, git is built on the assumption that this is the best way to work. "Everything is local"

This is the way I or we usually use branches:

  • Main dev branch (Master)

  • Project branch, used to merge in features added by this project. When all features have been added and seems to work this is pushed/merged into the master branch.

  • Developer branches, every developer has his/her own branch to develop a specific feature before pushing/merging that into the project branch.

What could sometimes be good to have is also specific release branches. I.e. when a project has merged all added features into the master branch and everything seems ok, a release branch is created for regression testing. This branch will eventually contain the released software when all testing has been done. The benefit of doing a separate release branch is that the main branch can continue to be developed, but if a fast bugfix has to be done on an earlier release it can be done on that release branch and then later merged into the master branch.

//jk

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions