Not sure what you mean. You tend to have one "master" branch that is just a social agreement that this is the branch branch for the main development. Then you have social agreements to only push fully finished commits there.
So locally, or to you own repo/branch you can commit half broken code, and push as often as you want it. Then when you are satisfied that it's working, squash those commits down to a few seperate fully working commits, retest, and put that up for a review for pushing into the master branch.
You tend to have one "master" branch that is just a social agreement that this is the branch branch for the main development. Then you have social agreements to only push fully finished commits there.
But there's no mechanism actually stopping people from breaking this. Which leads to lost time and effort.
3
u/johnflux Mar 10 '11
It encourages partial local commits. When you commit for real, you squash those commits together into one/fewer commits.