🔄

Git Flow and CI: A Critical Overview

Apr 2, 2025

Git Flow and Continuous Integration

Introduction

  • Speaker: Dave Farley of Continuous Delivery
  • Context: Discussion of Git Flow and its compatibility with Continuous Integration (CI) and Continuous Delivery (CD).
  • Key Idea: Git Flow, while popular, may impede CI practices.

What is Git Flow?

  • Inventor: Vincent Driessen (2010)
  • Branches Involved:
    • Develop
    • Master
    • Additional branches: Feature, Release, Hotfix.
  • Model: Based on Git; the naming of branches is arbitrary.

Git Flow vs Continuous Integration

  • CI Objective: Establish a shared, accurate version of the system.
  • Issues with Git Flow:
    • Creates complexity with multiple branches.
    • May lead to outdated evaluations (develop and master can be out of sync).
    • Assumes merging happens when a feature is deemed "complete," delaying feedback.

Continuous Integration Principles

  • Frequent Feedback: Developers should receive immediate feedback on changes.
  • Daily Integration: Most agree that integrating changes at least daily qualifies as CI.
  • Safety of Changes: Changes should be releasable and work with others' changes.

Alternative Approaches

  • Trunk-Based Development:
    • Push changes directly to the master branch, allowing for continuous integration feedback.
  • Recommendation Against Git Flow:
    • Git Flow is more suited for teams not practicing CI effectively.
    • Brian Finster's outreach led to updates on Git Flow's relevance in CI contexts.

Updates on Git Flow

  • Vincent Driessen suggested simpler workflows like GitHub Flow for continuous delivery.
  • Atlassian's Take: Git Flow is now regarded as a legacy workflow, with trunk-based workflows preferred for modern practices.

Critique of GitHub Flow

  • While simpler, GitHub Flow still exhibits issues similar to Git Flow (slower feedback, reliance on feature branches until complete).
  • Lack of Testing Emphasis: Both Git Flow and GitHub Flow lack a strong emphasis on automated testing practices.

Key Takeaways

  • Incremental Approach: Continuous Integration encourages incremental development rather than isolated feature development, which aligns better with real-world software development challenges.
  • Risk Assessment: Continuous Integration maintains software quality dynamically, as opposed to isolating changes and hoping for compatibility at the end.
  • Final Thought: Continuous Integration practices improve efficiency and effectiveness in software development.

Full transcript