[vipull]

Here’s a process that worked well for us back when I was a manager managing a largeish devteam.. we cut a release every week, and the bug fixes would go into a branch cut from the release branch, merged back into main after the release (well-tested) We had a lot of manual QA so we never got to experiment with automated frameworks like cypress (jobs for aa people were important so automated testing was never a priority..:)!

We never experimented with ci/cd but that was done to avoid overhead..

So here’s the branch layout: main branch(always releasable), develop (into which personal dev branches/feature branches are merged), and then we had release branches. No automation of any kind but this is India and we had a lot of manual labor and manpower at disposal. YMMV so take my advice with a pinch of salt.

I’d say keep the git-flow but structure things differently. git-flow has a lot of modern benefits!