[Ixio]

Are people really calling this specific model of git branching THE Gitflow model ? For me this was a gitflow amongst others, a gitflow being a git workflow.

In the original article "A successful Git branching model" I don't see a single mention telling people they should call this specific model Gitflow.

For me the word gitflow has the useful meaning of a git branching model, am I in the minority ? Using it as a noun for a specific model seems like a waste of the word.

In regards to the article, sure this gitflow is one of the most shared images on the subject. However I recommend that every team use whatever gitflow makes the most sense for them and their project. I was not aware that our industry had a problem with teams cargo culting that specific git workflow.

[daxelrod]

Interesting. I have only ever heard "gitflow" used to refer to the specific model described in https://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ . The author also wrote a tool, "git-flow", to assist with this model https://github.com/nvie/gitflow .

I have heard the terms "git branching model" or "git workflow" used for the concept that you call "gitflow".

[danw1979]

nvie/gitflow is a long dead project. There's an active fork at https://github.com/petervanderdoes/gitflow-avh

[Ixio]

Thanks for the link, at the very least Jeff Kreeftmeijer in 2010 already used the name git-flow for that specific model. I somehow missed all of that.

Plus nvie.com updated its 10-year old post with a notice yesterday and also uses the name git-flow there.

I guess I'd better use the term git workflow in the future.

[amenod]

+1. We use as many branches as it makes sense on a particular project. Simple ones might have just master (and temporary feature/bugfix branches). Only when we need to have a LTS version do we introduce another branch for it.

I always thought this is also Gitflow, but reading this article, I'm not so sure anymore.