Anuj Gakhar <anuj.gakhar <at> gmail.com> writes: > > Hi all, > > I am new to Git and learning this powerful tool these days. > > I have a simple question :- > > I work on a project that has 3 different environments. dev, staging > and production. dev is obviously the local git repo that all dev's > work on. staging is where most of the development takes places on a > daily basis. and production is where least development happens but we > still do it because sometimes we have to fix things quickly directly > on the production server. > > So how should I set this up ? > > 2 branches staging and master (default) ? I wouldn't use "master" for the production branch, I'd call it simply "production" (there's nothing special about master, except that it's the default when you start). However, it's quite easy to change it anytime. Especially, each developer may create their own private branches at will. When working on multiple topics concurrently you'll probably create multiple shared "staging" branches. It's all very fast and very easy to do. > How can I make it so that the staging branch gets deployed to a > different folder on the server and the master branch gets deployed on > a different folder ? You can control both the working tree directory and the git directory using environment variables (GIT_WORK_TREE and GIT_DIR), so it's easy, e.g. cd stagingFolder; GIT_DIR=..../.git git checkout staging You can use options like --git-dir instead, s. http://www.kernel.org/pub/ software/scm/git/docs/ > Once a week, we would merge all the staging work into production and > make a release. > > Any ideas ? It may be useful to have a single person responsible for this merging. -- 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