git-novice
git-novice copied to clipboard
swcarpentry
Workflow clarity in Collaborating and Conflicts
The end of 8 - Collaborating includes a "Basic Collaborative Workflow". A visual representation of this that connects the actions and commands to the learner's mental model (working, staging, local repo, remote) would be very helpful.
I'd suggest a variant of the diagram in 9 - Conflicts that shows an individual's basic workflow. The diagram in Conflicts can then be updated to have order (i.e. a conflict is a race condition - both pull, both edit, one pushes before the other) and make it clear what is impacted at each step (local repos, working copies, or remote).
Similarly, when the workflow is referenced again with respect to minimizing conflicts at the end of lesson 9, there should be a clear distinction between individual workflow best practices vs. common group practices -- all of which are process/project management related (the lesson refers to the individual workflow practices as "technical approaches").
@esmesh, thanks for the feedback. We are always looking to improve the lesson.
Can you clarify the diagram you're referring to in episode 9? The only diagram in that episode show a merge conflict, not an individual's basic workflow; I don't think that diagram lends itself to describing an overall workflow, but it could be that I just need to see it created by someone. Feel free to create and submit a PR for a visual aid demonstrating the collaborative workflow.
I think I was referring to adding something like the episode 9 diagram into the episode 8 "Basic Collaborative Workflow" section - for consistency and so the the episode 9 visualization would then build on the one from episode 8. (It's been a long time since I looked at this.)
I think I was referring to adding something like the episode 9 diagram into the episode 8 "Basic Collaborative Workflow" section - for consistency and so the the episode 9 visualization would then build on the one from episode 8. (It's been a long time since I looked at this.)
I understand, @esmesh. Thanks for the clarification!