lesson_3_reflections.txt

Can you see this on your local machine?
	yeah bitch
	
Why might you want to always pull changes manually rather than having Git automatically stay up-to-date with your remote repository?
	Because the local changes might need merging with the remote commit. It would be nice to do it one time rather than during intermediate steps.
	
Describe the differences between forks, clones, and branches. When would you use one instead of another?
	FORK
		1.multiple repo
		2.No permission to push/pull in original repo
	CLONE
		1.multiple copies of single repo
		2.For collaboration
	BRANCH
		1.single repo
		2.For Bug fix/new feature

What is the benefit of having a copy of the last known state of the remote stored locally?
	what if it is not?
		directly push your changes to remote. No way to determine if the new changes break anything. the remote commit history is fragile. Always breaking.
	benfit
		Robust and stable commits go into main branch of remote
		
How would you collaborate without using Git or GitHub? What would be easier, and what would be harder?
	How?
		code base at one location
		I want to work on some feature, I will copy the code to my local machine
		Make changes.
		Then merge changes using diff -u command
	what would be easier?
		Not knowing git commands
	what would be harder?
		Very hard to merge changes.


When would you want to make changes in a separate branch rather than directly in master? What benefits does each approach have?
	when?
		when collaborating with other people.
	benefit of seperate branch
		 experimental feature, that may not be pulled into main, no seperate branch means breaking other codes if they dependent on the experimental feature
		 Others may get time to change their code when a breaking pull request is made.
		 
	benefit of directly working on master
		no need to keep track of different branches