Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

7
  • 3
    For a small software shop, the approach that you describe sounds ideal. The only critique I would offer is that feature branch names ought to include a ticket number, so you can tell what modifications are in scope for that feature branch, and so you can tell when the feature is done, that is, when the ticket has been closed out. Otherwise there is a tendency for feature scope to creep, so a feature branch will last for a little more calendar time than was originally envisioned for it. Commented Jan 17, 2024 at 21:10
  • @J_H The OP doesn’t mention using a “ticket system” so I don’t see how ticket numbers are relevant to the scope of this question. Commented Jan 17, 2024 at 22:36
  • 1
    @Guildenstern yes. Didn't mentioned it in first place. But I want to work with milestones and issues. Commented Jan 17, 2024 at 22:41
  • 1
    @Guildenstern, yes OP mentioned "Gitea server", which offers issue tracking. Commented Jan 17, 2024 at 23:05
  • 2
    @amon I think nvie gitflow (nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model) seems way more complicated than what I described. Ye, I thought about having only one version to support. But in our company features are often getting deployed very early to customer machines. Meanwhile other customers stay on an older release an should also get Bugfixes, while newer version is "tested" in production on customer machine. Commented Jan 18, 2024 at 6:27