I think it's a balance. There is value in having people working on a given project aligned on the same basic workflow. To achieve that for a team that is currently growing or is planning to grow, you have to document what that basic workflow should look like. That "document" can be a set of social mores that are loosely enforced through complaint and argument, or an actual document somewhere, or a tool like your parent is suggesting.
Such a tool, which makes the preferred workflow very easy and excursions outside it achievable but somewhat more difficult seems like a pretty good idea to me, and not at all as stuffy and prohibitive as you seem to fear.
I don't disagree at all. But in reality, those tools exist and are all around us. What would be the value of putting that stuff into git itself? Why is it a shortcoming of git that it hasn't picked one?
Comments
I think it's a balance. There is value in having people working on a given project aligned on the same basic workflow. To achieve that for a team that is currently growing or is planning to grow, you have to document what that basic workflow should look like. That "document" can be a set of social mores that are loosely enforced through complaint and argument, or an actual document somewhere, or a tool like your parent is suggesting.
Such a tool, which makes the preferred workflow very easy and excursions outside it achievable but somewhat more difficult seems like a pretty good idea to me, and not at all as stuffy and prohibitive as you seem to fear.
I don't disagree at all. But in reality, those tools exist and are all around us. What would be the value of putting that stuff into git itself? Why is it a shortcoming of git that it hasn't picked one?