So, no opinions on this?
On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 9:38 AM Darryl L. Pierce <mcpierce@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Had a discussion at work this week about branching schemes and the
topic of using master/develop vs just using master for commits came
up. So I wanted to get some feedback from you all on what you think
about this.
MASTER ONLY STRATEGY:
PROS:
* Only ever targeting one branch for PRs.
* No merge commits after a release is made.
* Only have to worry about one branch for incremental builds.
CONS:
* Harder to release fixes for previous version if a lot of changes
have happened on MASTER.
* No clear separation of development from support.
* If development is on master, master no longer represents that last
stable release
What do you guys think? Is there a reason to drop the develop branch
and go with a master-only strategy, or should we keep the separation
between master and develop as it is today?
--
Darryl L. Pierce <mcpierce@xxxxxxxxx>
"Le centre du monde est partout." - Blaise Pascal
"Let's try and find some point of transcendence and leap together." -
Gord Downie
