Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I work on an embedded device. Our tests include power analysis testing in LTE/GPS simulators of all the sleep/wake states. Total testing of a release takes about two weeks.

Trying to keep master consistent without git-flow means we get PRs sitting around for a month and merge-conflict hell days when we merge everything to make a build to send to QA.

Git-flow is bad if you have CD. Git-flow is great if you can't do that.



The part that's most contentious about git-flow is release branches.

You still should merge often to develop, which when tested becomes master.


The issue there is that you typically find some issues in testing, and need to fix them. That's why you test. You can either have a release branch and a develop branch, cherry-picking/merging fixes into the release branch as well as develop, or you can just hold off on merging any "not-for-this-release" branches for a few weeks. Just let the PR sit there. Alone. In the dark.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: