tome export

content/node.aba09cf2-f67c-4056-b503-5a53399e634b.json

@@ -82,15 +82,15 @@
     ],
     "body": [
         {
-            "value": "\n          <p>After <a href=\"/daily\/2024\/03\/27\/hotfixing-without-branches\">Wednesday's email<\/a>, someone said, \"It sounds like you and I use git very differently.\" So, I wanted to explain what my typical Git workflow is.<\/p>\n\n<p>I used to use Git Flow, but now, I almost never create a new branch when starting a new task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I keep my workflow as simple as possible by using trunk-based development and working on a single branch as much as I can.<\/p>\n\n<p>Before I start, I make sure any uncommitted changes are committed or reset and that the automated tests, static analysis, coding standards checks, etc., are passing so I know I'm starting from a good place.<\/p>\n\n<p>Then, I start working on the task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I like to work in small steps and make small, regular commits, but I don't always push each individual commit to the remote repository.<\/p>\n\n<p>Sometimes, I'll make a number of \"work in progress\" commits and squash them into one before pushing them.<\/p>\n\n<p>I want the time between making and pushing the commit to be as short as possible, and I want each commit to be deployable.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm doing test-driven development, I'll typically commit each time a test is passing - whether it's adding a new test or extending one.<\/p>\n\n<p>I run any tests often whilst writing code to ensure they pass, either using a watch command or a keybinding in Neovim.<\/p>\n\n<p>I won't push a commit that would cause the code to not work, a test to fail, or block any other (potentially more urgent) changes from being pushed to production.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I push a commit that breaks the CI pipeline, I'll fix it quickly, which is usually possible as the changes are small.<\/p>\n\n<p>If not, I'll revert the commit to get back to a deployable state as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm going to add a feature flag, I'll usually know that in advance and avoid rushing to add one later if a more urgent task comes in.<\/p>\n\n<p>By keeping each commit in a working and deployable state, a change can be feature flagged and deployed but not activated until the feature flag is enabled.<\/p>\n\n        ",
+            "value": "\n          <p>After <a href=\"\/daily\/2024\/03\/27\/hotfixing-without-branches\">Wednesday's email<\/a>, someone said, \"It sounds like you and I use git very differently.\" So, I wanted to explain what my typical Git workflow is.<\/p>\n\n<p>I used to use Git Flow, but now, I almost never create a new branch when starting a new task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I keep my workflow as simple as possible by using trunk-based development and working on a single branch as much as I can.<\/p>\n\n<p>Before I start, I make sure any uncommitted changes are committed or reset and that the automated tests, static analysis, coding standards checks, etc., are passing so I know I'm starting from a good place.<\/p>\n\n<p>Then, I start working on the task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I like to work in small steps and make small, regular commits, but I don't always push each individual commit to the remote repository.<\/p>\n\n<p>Sometimes, I'll make a number of \"work in progress\" commits and squash them into one before pushing them.<\/p>\n\n<p>I want the time between making and pushing the commit to be as short as possible, and I want each commit to be deployable.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm doing test-driven development, I'll typically commit each time a test is passing - whether it's adding a new test or extending one.<\/p>\n\n<p>I run any tests often whilst writing code to ensure they pass, either using a watch command or a keybinding in Neovim.<\/p>\n\n<p>I won't push a commit that would cause the code to not work, a test to fail, or block any other (potentially more urgent) changes from being pushed to production.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I push a commit that breaks the CI pipeline, I'll fix it quickly, which is usually possible as the changes are small.<\/p>\n\n<p>If not, I'll revert the commit to get back to a deployable state as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm going to add a feature flag, I'll usually know that in advance and avoid rushing to add one later if a more urgent task comes in.<\/p>\n\n<p>By keeping each commit in a working and deployable state, a change can be feature flagged and deployed but not activated until the feature flag is enabled.<\/p>\n\n        ",
             "format": "full_html",
-            "processed": "\n          <p>After <a href=\"/daily\/2024\/03\/27\/hotfixing-without-branches\">Wednesday's email<\/a>, someone said, \"It sounds like you and I use git very differently.\" So, I wanted to explain what my typical Git workflow is.<\/p>\n\n<p>I used to use Git Flow, but now, I almost never create a new branch when starting a new task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I keep my workflow as simple as possible by using trunk-based development and working on a single branch as much as I can.<\/p>\n\n<p>Before I start, I make sure any uncommitted changes are committed or reset and that the automated tests, static analysis, coding standards checks, etc., are passing so I know I'm starting from a good place.<\/p>\n\n<p>Then, I start working on the task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I like to work in small steps and make small, regular commits, but I don't always push each individual commit to the remote repository.<\/p>\n\n<p>Sometimes, I'll make a number of \"work in progress\" commits and squash them into one before pushing them.<\/p>\n\n<p>I want the time between making and pushing the commit to be as short as possible, and I want each commit to be deployable.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm doing test-driven development, I'll typically commit each time a test is passing - whether it's adding a new test or extending one.<\/p>\n\n<p>I run any tests often whilst writing code to ensure they pass, either using a watch command or a keybinding in Neovim.<\/p>\n\n<p>I won't push a commit that would cause the code to not work, a test to fail, or block any other (potentially more urgent) changes from being pushed to production.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I push a commit that breaks the CI pipeline, I'll fix it quickly, which is usually possible as the changes are small.<\/p>\n\n<p>If not, I'll revert the commit to get back to a deployable state as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm going to add a feature flag, I'll usually know that in advance and avoid rushing to add one later if a more urgent task comes in.<\/p>\n\n<p>By keeping each commit in a working and deployable state, a change can be feature flagged and deployed but not activated until the feature flag is enabled.<\/p>\n\n        ",
+            "processed": "\n          <p>After <a href=\"http:\/\/default\/daily\/2024\/03\/27\/hotfixing-without-branches\">Wednesday's email<\/a>, someone said, \"It sounds like you and I use git very differently.\" So, I wanted to explain what my typical Git workflow is.<\/p>\n\n<p>I used to use Git Flow, but now, I almost never create a new branch when starting a new task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I keep my workflow as simple as possible by using trunk-based development and working on a single branch as much as I can.<\/p>\n\n<p>Before I start, I make sure any uncommitted changes are committed or reset and that the automated tests, static analysis, coding standards checks, etc., are passing so I know I'm starting from a good place.<\/p>\n\n<p>Then, I start working on the task.<\/p>\n\n<p>I like to work in small steps and make small, regular commits, but I don't always push each individual commit to the remote repository.<\/p>\n\n<p>Sometimes, I'll make a number of \"work in progress\" commits and squash them into one before pushing them.<\/p>\n\n<p>I want the time between making and pushing the commit to be as short as possible, and I want each commit to be deployable.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm doing test-driven development, I'll typically commit each time a test is passing - whether it's adding a new test or extending one.<\/p>\n\n<p>I run any tests often whilst writing code to ensure they pass, either using a watch command or a keybinding in Neovim.<\/p>\n\n<p>I won't push a commit that would cause the code to not work, a test to fail, or block any other (potentially more urgent) changes from being pushed to production.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I push a commit that breaks the CI pipeline, I'll fix it quickly, which is usually possible as the changes are small.<\/p>\n\n<p>If not, I'll revert the commit to get back to a deployable state as quickly as possible.<\/p>\n\n<p>If I'm going to add a feature flag, I'll usually know that in advance and avoid rushing to add one later if a more urgent task comes in.<\/p>\n\n<p>By keeping each commit in a working and deployable state, a change can be feature flagged and deployed but not activated until the feature flag is enabled.<\/p>\n\n        ",
             "summary": null
         }
     ],
     "feeds_item": [
         {
-            "imported": "1970-01-01T00:33:45+00:00",
+            "imported": "1970-01-01T00:32:50+00:00",
             "guid": null,
             "hash": "1fdb0bb1e22238ec9d831d2b2a3af864",
             "target_type": "feeds_feed",