On 09/21/2010 04:42 PM, FernandoBasso wrote: > > I am really a beginner in. Bear with me please. > > Why do we merge, say a testing branch into the master branch ? What is the > use of it ? > Because the sum of the whole is greater than the parts. Most features in git for example are developed on topic branches. This makes it possible to keep unfinished code separate from the production branch that people actually use. > When there is a conflict when merging branches (merging the testing into the > current branch), should I edit the 'current' branch or the 'testing' branch > ? > You should edit the working tree, since that's where the conflict will be staged. When you're done, commit the results and that will be a new commit on the branch you're on. > Should both branches have exactly the same code so that they can be merged > without conflicts ? > Both branches should most definitely not have exactly the same code. If they did, there would be no point in merging them. The merge-result shouldn't have the same code as any of the branches either, unless you actually want to throw one branch away, in which case you'd be far better off doing just that. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231 Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war on peace. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html