Question

I have been working on a stream (s1) and I want to merge these changes with another stream(s2)

I do not want to deliver my changes to s2 but create or use a stream that contains the merges of s1 & s2.

I think I have two possilbe solutions :

1.

Create a new stream based on s2, lets call it s3 and change my flow target to s3.
Deliver all changes to s3.

I don't think I will lose change set history with this approach ?

2.

Change my flow target to s2
Accept all changes from s2
Change my flow target to s1
Deliver my changes to s1

What option should I choose, are there alternatives ?

Was it helpful?

Solution

  • "1." is the safest, isolating the result of the merge in S3
  • "2." would publish the result of the merge directly in S1

So it depends who needs the result of this merge, and for what.

  • if you need to test a bit the result of that merge, while you go on developing S1, then having S3 is handy.
  • but if you need, for developing S1, to have S2 devs merged in it, then scenario "2." is the more direct approach.
Licensed under: CC-BY-SA with attribution
Not affiliated with StackOverflow
scroll top