I have a problem that's very hard to google, so I decided to ask about it here.
我有一个问题，谷歌很难，所以我决定在这里问一下。
I've created a system (a rails app) that handles user registration for a conference. The system is under active development.
我创建了一个处理会议用户注册的系统（rails应用程序）。该系统正在积极开发中。
Now, I'm helping to run another conference, and I want to use pretty much the same system, with only minor changes to the codebase. However, I want to maintain some level of parallelism between the two projects, so I can easily push generic improvements to both systems. I also want to be able to change both independently.
现在，我正在帮助运行另一个会议，我想使用几乎相同的系统，只需对代码库进行微小的更改。但是，我希望在两个项目之间保持一定程度的并行性，因此我可以轻松地将两个系统的通用改进推进。我也希望能够独立改变它们。
My gut feeling is that I should use a branch for each conference's system, and then whenever I have a master change, run git merge master in both projects.
我的直觉是我应该为每个会议的系统使用一个分支，然后每当我有一个主变更时，在两个项目中运行git merge master。
Is there a smoother way to do this? Does git have a built-in method for handling automatic pushes to branches?
有更顺畅的方法吗？ git是否有内置的方法来处理自动推送到分支？
Thanks in advance. I apologize if this question isn't as "answerable" as * likes.
提前致谢。如果这个问题不像*那样“回答”，我很抱歉。
2 个解决方案
#1
2
What you propose (3 branches) would certainly work, but if I were to do it, I'd probably make 3 git repositories rather than 3 branches.
你提出的建议（3个分支）肯定会有用，但如果我这样做，我可能会制作3个git存储库而不是3个分支。
There is no way for git to automatically merge the master branch (your shared library) into the two implementation branches. You would need to do that yourself.
git无法自动将主分支（您的共享库）合并到两个实现分支中。你需要自己做。
#2
2
I would use two branches for now, but heavily prioritize fixing the code itself to support the modifications in a single codebase. Otherwise you'll experience more and more pain as the code changes and/or the variants diverge: bigger merges, more space for conflicts, harder refactoring, etc.
我现在会使用两个分支，但是重点优先考虑修复代码本身以支持单个代码库中的修改。否则，随着代码的变化和/或变体的分歧，你会遇到越来越多的痛苦：更大的合并，更多的冲突空间，更难的重构等等。
#1
2
What you propose (3 branches) would certainly work, but if I were to do it, I'd probably make 3 git repositories rather than 3 branches.
你提出的建议（3个分支）肯定会有用，但如果我这样做，我可能会制作3个git存储库而不是3个分支。
There is no way for git to automatically merge the master branch (your shared library) into the two implementation branches. You would need to do that yourself.
git无法自动将主分支（您的共享库）合并到两个实现分支中。你需要自己做。
#2
2
I would use two branches for now, but heavily prioritize fixing the code itself to support the modifications in a single codebase. Otherwise you'll experience more and more pain as the code changes and/or the variants diverge: bigger merges, more space for conflicts, harder refactoring, etc.
我现在会使用两个分支，但是重点优先考虑修复代码本身以支持单个代码库中的修改。否则，随着代码的变化和/或变体的分歧，你会遇到越来越多的痛苦：更大的合并，更多的冲突空间，更难的重构等等。