Hacker News Reader

I second the copy paste solution. I don't understand devs that cherrypick.

There is a semantic difference. If you just copy paste code from the master branch to a release branch it might be unclear where that code came from. A cherry pick makes it clear that you ported a bugfix from the master to the release branch.

You obviously don't need many git features if you are working alone or with only 1-2 team members but the bigger the organization the more complex the git workflow becomes.

when setup right, cherry-pick is simply more efficient.

How do you set it up right?

By making commits that can be cherry-picked. If one commit adds five different things then you can't add just one of those five things with git cherry-pick.

Then instead of making a second copy and then pasting the code over and commiting it, it's just git cherry-pick and you're done.

So trust other devs. Got it.

Yeah, I know that other people suck and dealing with them is difficult, but this is why there's code review and a company culture. Those soft skills that you think you don't need because you're so smart and everyone else is dumb? turns out they're the smart ones and you're the dumb one for not working on those skills in addition to the stuff you're awesome at because those skills will get them (and you) further in life than any others.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com