3 ms·
> although that will "waste" some time. Not so much, although it wastes someone's time. Someone has to be the release manager, and git-flow gives them only on
by geocar 13y ago
> although that will "waste" some time.
Not so much, although it wastes someone's time.
Someone has to be the release manager, and git-flow gives them only one tool: To reject the release by pushing back.
If they eliminate the develop branch and merge the features directly into the release branch (whenever they attempt to perform a release) then if something goes wrong, they can simply drop one of the features and re-build their branch.
- VLM 13y agoThat sounds like an overly exciting way to avoid using the hotfix branch in git-flow. If I'm reading you correctly you're saying something like implement hotfix branches but call them feature branches and just kinda skip develop, or rephrased type in the word "feature" on the command line but use it like a hotfix is supposed to be used. I think that sounds exciting and strongly encourage my competitors to try it. (no, seriously though, don't do it...)