Hi there, we are a small tram of social researchers working on writing a collective report together. The report has several chapters. Our plan is to use git to store changes and easily traceback to different versions as well as allowing everyone to experiment with new ideas.
I am trying to decide a branching strategy, and so far I guess something like feature branching could do. We could have a branch for each chapter…? And maybe, when a chapter is kind ready, we could merge into main…?
We will have members working potentially on different parts of the report in different moments.
Advice is needed. Thank you!
Sounds like a fine usecase for git.
I don’t know the structure of your work, and there is not one correct way to do things.
“Too short” branches would be when you open and merge into main multiple times a day. “Too long” branches would be when one person works on their own branch for months without checking the whole.
In software, before merging into main, it’s customary to have a person other than the author review and (dis)approve the changes.
Thank you for your reply! What are the “objects” possibly determining a branch? Features? Chapters? Writers? Releases?
The first commit on main would be a rough structure of the document.
Then branches for each feature (in your case perhaps “abstract”, “chapter 2: intro” “chapter 2: methodology” “chapter 2: conclusion”), and branches for bugs (in your case perhaps: “proofreading and errata chapter 2”, “correct legend figure 4.2”).