Fix grammar mistakes, thanks Angus
This commit is contained in:
parent
9297f01289
commit
d8a645ac39
|
|
@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ Git flow was one of the first proposals to use git branches and it has gotten a
|
|||
It advocates a master branch and a separate develop branch as well as supporting branches for features, releases and hotfixes.
|
||||
The development happens on the develop branch, moves to a release branch and is finally merged into the master branch.
|
||||
Git flow is a well defined standard but its complexity introduces two problems.
|
||||
The first one problem is that developers must use the develop branch and not master, master is reserved for code that is released to production.
|
||||
The first problem is that developers must use the develop branch and not master, master is reserved for code that is released to production.
|
||||
It is a convention to call your default branch master and to mostly branch from and merge to this.
|
||||
Since most tools automatically make the master branch the default one and display that one by default it is annoying to have to switch to another one.
|
||||
The second problem of git flow is the complexity introduced by the hotfix and release branches.
|
||||
|
|
@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ These branches can be good idea for some organizations but are overkill for the
|
|||
Nowadays most organizations practice continuous delivery which means that your default branch can be deployed.
|
||||
This means that hotfixed and release branches can be prevented including all the ceremony they introduce.
|
||||
An example of this ceremony is the merging back of release branches.
|
||||
Even tough special tools exist to do this still requires documentation.
|
||||
Though specialized tools do exist to solve this, they require documentation and add complexity.
|
||||
Frequently developers make a mistake and for example changes are only merged into master and not into the develop branch.
|
||||
The root cause of these errors is that git flow is too complex for most of the use cases.
|
||||
And doing releases doesn't automatically mean also doing hotfixes.
|
||||
|
|
@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ In reaction to git flow a simpler alternative was detailed, [GitHub flow](http:/
|
|||
This flow has only feature branches and a master branch.
|
||||
This is very simple and clean, many organizations have adopted it with great success.
|
||||
Atlassian recommends [a similar strategy](http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/01/simple-git-workflow-simple/) although they rebase feature branches.
|
||||
Merging everything into the master branch and deploying often means you minimize the amount of code in 'inventory' which rhymes with the lean and continuous delivery best practices.
|
||||
Merging everything into the master branch and deploying often means you minimize the amount of code in 'inventory' which is in line with the lean and continuous delivery best practices.
|
||||
But this flow still leaves a lot of questions unanswered regarding deployments, environments, releases and integrations with issues.
|
||||
With GitLab flow we offer additional guidance for these questions.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue