[Insight-developers] [master] Change I823fe9e4: (ITK) Moved QuadEdge Mesh datastrcture, filters and helpers out of...

[Brad King]

On 09/23/2010 08:02 AM, Alexandre GOUAILLARD wrote:
> my first idea would be, once I m done with my branch, successful
> experimental build submitted and all, I would pull from Master,
> resolve the conflicts locally, and when everything works again
> (successful experimental send to the dashboard) I would merge into
> master.
> 
> Instead, we have a stage branch. What is the advantage of having the
> stage branch compared to the above method?

The stage serializes the merges, maintaining a nice history shape:

  http://public.kitware.com/Wiki/Git/Workflow/Topic#History_Shape

Races between two developers merging topics at the same time are handled
one at a time automatically in one order or the other.

The role of the stage is more important when we have multiple integration
branches.  When a topic has been merged to 'next' but not 'master' then
the Topic Stage keeps an explicitly named ref pointing at the topic head.
This helps us keep track of topics in progress.

-Brad K