Why should the Git feature branch be pulled from the dev branch?

problem description

the team uses git for version control. There is a master branch and a dev branch, which stipulates that major functions should be developed as a feature feature branch, and feature should be pulled out of dev, but isn"t there a lot of radical code on dev? why not pull it out of the stable version of master? I don"t understand what it means.

Git
Apr.07,2021

this is a popular git-flow development mode:

however, it is true that our current development process is to develop a new branch directly in master, using the workflow recommended by gitlab: https://about.gitlab.com/2014.

.

I think git-flow is suitable for developing traditional software, while gitlab-flow is more suitable for developing Internet products.


feature is not the so-called radical code without sufficient demonstration and testing?


Internet teams prefer to use master to pull feature branches, that is, to develop new features in a stable version, which ensures fast iteration. Dev pull branch is too traditional, it takes a long time to hold back, hold back a lot of feature (different feature will inadvertently create dependencies) to release dev together.


can't answer your question by name judgment, it mainly depends on what kind of role your dev branch is.

maybe your Dev branch does master's job, but your supervisor thinks that if you leave an extra master insurance, svg's mind hasn't changed.

Menu