Hi,
Gregory Casamento wrote:
Gregory Casamento wrote:
Here is a link, for reference: https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows/gitflow-workflow
Some might argue that this should only be done with large teams, but I used this process on a small team when I worked at a company known as customink where we only had 4 people and it still helped things go very smoothly.
This is the process I've been trying to adhere to. I would advocate that, if PRs could have prevented this then, perhaps, we should all move to it. I had a discussion with Riccardo where he thought this process was too much and was silly and that merging to the master branch directly is always the best way to go. That's precisely what caused this. We can make all of the arguments that "a focused developer wouldn't make these mistakes" but that's BS. Process is here to prevent mistakes or to mitigate them.
Actually... I might revise what I previsouly said, also because while discussing thigns with Fred and Gregory, I propose essentially the same model, with two "amendments"
1) some minor stuff can also be done directly in "develop" instead of Master (e.g. to follow Richard's flow, to avoid having too many branches)
2) to have us all developers essentially build and compile "develop" which becomes the equivalent of our current trunk
Trunk thus becomes the "stable". If we all live on the violet branch, it means that we continue checking stuff. Thus, still keep the mantra that "Develop" should not break, although it is not as bad as "Trunk"
What do you think?
Riccardo