Oliver Davies
7a7dc297ca
Now the abs_to_rel module is enabled, links can be made relative so they work on the current environment.
100 lines
No EOL
6.2 KiB
JSON
100 lines
No EOL
6.2 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"uuid": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "aba09cf2-f67c-4056-b503-5a53399e634b"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"langcode": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "en"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"type": [
|
|
{
|
|
"target_id": "daily_email",
|
|
"target_type": "node_type",
|
|
"target_uuid": "8bde1f2f-eef9-4f2d-ae9c-96921f8193d7"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"revision_timestamp": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "2025-05-11T09:00:16+00:00"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"revision_uid": [
|
|
{
|
|
"target_type": "user",
|
|
"target_uuid": "b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"revision_log": [],
|
|
"status": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": true
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"uid": [
|
|
{
|
|
"target_type": "user",
|
|
"target_uuid": "b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"title": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "How I Git"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"created": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "2024-03-29T00:00:00+00:00"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"changed": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": "2025-05-11T09:00:16+00:00"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"promote": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": false
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"sticky": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": false
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"default_langcode": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": true
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"revision_translation_affected": [
|
|
{
|
|
"value": true
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"path": [
|
|
{
|
|
"alias": "\/daily\/2024\/03\/29\/how-i-git",
|
|
"langcode": "en"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"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 ",
|
|
"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 ",
|
|
"summary": null
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"feeds_item": [
|
|
{
|
|
"imported": "1970-01-01T00:33:45+00:00",
|
|
"guid": null,
|
|
"hash": "1fdb0bb1e22238ec9d831d2b2a3af864",
|
|
"target_type": "feeds_feed",
|
|
"target_uuid": "90c85284-7ca8-4074-9178-97ff8384fe76"
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
} |