I’ve been trying to better the pros and cons of git branching strategies.
After LLMing and YouTubing around, this is what I collated together:
| Strategy ♟️ | Description 📃 | Ideal For 💡 | Pros 👍 | Cons 👎 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Git Flow | Structured model with multiple long-lived branches: main, develop, feature, release, and hotfix. Suitable for projects with scheduled releases and multiple versions. | Large teams, complex projects, multiple release versions | Clear separation of concerns; supports parallel development; organized release process | Overhead in managing multiple branches; slower release cycles; steep learning curve for newcomers |
| GitHub Flow | Simplified workflow using main and short-lived feature branches. Emphasizes continuous integration and deployment. | Small teams, web applications, projects requiring frequent deployments | Fast-paced development; easy to understand; encourages code reviews and CI/CD | Not ideal for managing multiple versions; potential instability if not properly tested before merging |
| GitLab Flow | Combines Git Flow and GitHub Flow, integrating issue tracking and environment-based deployments (e.g., staging, production). | Teams needing structured workflows with environment-specific deployments | Flexible; supports multiple environments; integrates well with CI/CD pipelines | Can become complex with multiple environments; requires disciplined branch management |
| Trunk-Based Development | Developers work on a single main branch, committing small, frequent changes. Feature flags are often used to manage unfinished features. | Agile teams, projects aiming for continuous integration and delivery | Simplifies merge process; reduces integration issues; accelerates release cycles | Requires robust testing and discipline; may be challenging for teams not accustomed to frequent integrations |
| Release Flow | Focuses on creating a release branch from main for final testing and stabilization before deployment. Allows continued development on main during the release process. | Enterprise projects with strict release schedules and quality assurance processes | Enables parallel development and release preparation; facilitates hotfixes and patches | Additional overhead in managing release branches; potential for divergence between main and release branches |