Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Comments on Possible drawbacks for having duplicate local sources of the project tracking the same Git remote

Post

Possible drawbacks for having duplicate local sources of the project tracking the same Git remote

+5
−0

Context

I have started working on an Angular upgrade for a medium-sized project (from v. 10 to v. 15) and this is a rather long activity that is interrupted by other changes that need to be performed on the same project.

I have created another branch for the upgrade, but switching back to another branch takes a lot of time (npm install is very slow and the first npm start is the same) since branches use different node versions (I am switching these using nvm on Windows).

Possible mitigation

I am thinking of creating a local copy of the project, that tracks the same remote and work separately in the upgrade branch. Doing so requires being more careful (e.g. syncing changes done in the main branch).

Shortly put, I want to avoid making changes to the upgrade branch node_modules folder (as much as possible) until the upgrade is done.

Are there any other drawbacks to doing the local copy? Or is there any other solution to avoid wasting a lot of time switching back and forth from the upgrade branch?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

What's wrong with branches? (3 comments)
What's wrong with branches?
matthewsnyder‭ wrote 10 months ago

Isn't this exactly what branches are meant to take care of? What specifically would not work if you simply used a branch here? Are you worried about accidentally pushing commits to the upgrade branch without meaning to?

Alexei‭ wrote 10 months ago

Under normal circumstances, simply defining a branch would do the job (I am using a different branch anyway).

It is the actual switch time between the branches that's killing me. Switching from the upgrade branch to the "business as usual" branch means running npm install and npm start which take quite a long time since the Angular + 3rd party packages have different major versions (this is exacerbated by having a rather modest laptop + encryption + anti-virus + anti-malware).

matthewsnyder‭ wrote 10 months ago

Aha, I see. That does sound like a good reason to do multiple local copies.