Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by sn1de 2181 days ago
I honestly thought they were finally renouncing GitLab flow as a massively misguided idea. They are both flawed. You shouldn't be using branches in your version control system to denote stages in your development process or deployment targets. It totally breaks down when you move to CICD, which should be your goal. Trunk based is the way to go. These git flow things persist because that is what the search engines puke up when people google for git branching.
2 comments
aidenn0 2181 days ago
CD doesn't work for many types of software; it's not uncommon for customers to want only bugfixes (or even security bugfixes only), and that means branches.
link
boleary-gl 2181 days ago
GitLab Developer Evangelist here

GitLab flow is much closer to trunk based development than git flow is. While no one "flow" works for everyone, I think that we are clearly in agreement that the simpler you can make your workflow, the better. The problem is some companies and organizations can't get all the way to trunk-based development based on their own regulatory needs or the type of software they are producing.

That's why we think GitLab flow is a great way to balance both - in fact in the other linked blog post [1] we mention that GitLab flow should allow for CD from either branches or tags. From the main branch would then basically be the same as trunk based development, yes?

[1] https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2016/07/27/the-11-rules-of-git...

link