Question about features

[Daniel Carrera]

Maarten Bosmans wrote:
>> Some times I'll be working on "Feature A" and the boss asks me to fix
>> a bug in Feature B. So I fix Feature B, then I go back to Feature A.
>> When I finish Feature A I unrecord all the little changes that led to
>> Feature A and I re-record them as a single "Feature A" patch.
> 
> This really sound like you would be better of doing the fix for B on a
> separate bugfix branch. Is there any specific reason you have for
> mixing revisions for feature A and B, or am I just misunderstanding
> your workflow?

For small changes I can't be bothered. And small changes is usually what 
we are talking about. The boss might ask for a small change, or I might 
notice an easy to fix bug while I'm working on a larger feature. These 
things (esp the latter) happen very often.

Furthermore, adding a feature in reality usually involves adding three 
different things which should logically be in different commits. Usually 
I'll write one or more functions that talks to the database, a view that 
interacts with the user, and a controller that lies between them. For 
these things it doesn't make sense to say "I'll work on these in 
different branches". You need to develop them together, but I still want 
to have them in different commits.

Daniel.