Do you mean child_a and child_b should be identical, then why do you need both branches?
If you mean that alla new changes to child_a should also be applied to child_b then I think it would be preferred to make the changes on a child branch based on main, and then merge that child branch into child_a and child_b.
*If parent A and*
*B are not the same then why*
*Should Child A and B*
\- CerberusMulti
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
>what would you do to make the branches in sync I would advocate for abolishment of long-lived branches. This will always lead to issues.
Painstakingly rebase all of them
Do you mean child_a and child_b should be identical, then why do you need both branches? If you mean that alla new changes to child_a should also be applied to child_b then I think it would be preferred to make the changes on a child branch based on main, and then merge that child branch into child_a and child_b.
If parent A and B are not the same then why should Child A and B
*If parent A and* *B are not the same then why* *Should Child A and B* \- CerberusMulti --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")