Branching strategies In Git

Branches are independent lines of work, stemming from the original codebase. Developers create separate branches for independently working on features so that changes from other developers don’t interfere with an individual’s line of work. Developers can easily pull changes from different branches and also merge their code with the main branch. This allows easier collaboration for developers working on one codebase.

Git branching strategies are essential for efficient code management and collaboration within development teams. In this comprehensive guide, we will delve into the various Git branching strategies, their benefits, implementation steps, and best practices.

Key Terminologies

• Git Branch: A parallel version of the code within a Git repository, allowing for separate development and experimentation.
• Main Branch (formerly Master Branch): The primary branch of a Git repository where the production-ready code resides.
• Feature Branch: A branch created to work on a specific feature or task isolated from the main branch.
• Merge: The process of combining changes from one branch into another.
• Pull Request (PR): A request made by a developer to merge their changes into another branch, often used for code review.
• CI/CD Pipeline: Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment pipeline, automating the process of building, testing, and deploying code changes.

What Is A Branching Strategy?

A branching strategy is a strategy that software development teams adopt for writing, merging and deploying code with the help of a version control system like Git. It lays down a set of rules that aid the developers on how to go about the development process and interact with a shared codebase. Strategies like these are essential as they help in keeping project repositories organized, error free and avoid the dreaded merge conflicts when multiple developers simultaneously push and pull code from the same repository.

Encountering merge conflicts can impede the swift delivery of code, thereby obstructing the establishment and upkeep of an efficient DevOps workflow. DevOps aims to facilitate a rapid process for releasing incremental code changes. Therefore, implementing a structured branching strategy can alleviate this challenge, enabling developers to collaborate seamlessly and minimize conflicts. This approach fosters parallel workstreams within teams, promoting quicker releases and reduced likelihood of conflicts through a well-defined process for source control modifications.

The Branching strategies provides following features:

• Parallel development
• Enhanced productivity due to efficient collaboration
• Organized and structured feature releases
• Clear path for software development process
• Bug-free environment without disrupting development workflow

Step By Step Implementation Of Creating A Branch

The following are the steps for creating a branch:

Step 1: Create Branch

• Create a branch with the name you want to specify, here we are naming the branch name as “new-feature”.

git branch new-feature

Step 2: Navigate to Branch

• Now navigate to the new feature branch from the current branch with the following command:

git checkout new-feature

( or )

Step 3: Creating And Navigating Branch At A Time

• The following one command only helps in creating the branch and navigating to the branch.

git checkout -b new-feature

Step 4: Check Current Branch

• Execute the following command to check the current branch that you’re on.

git branch

Step 5: Delete a Branch

Ensure you are present on the branch you want to delete.

git branch -d <branch-to-delete>

Common Git Branching Strategies

The following are the common git branching strategies:

Gitflow Workflow

GitFlow enables parallel development, where developers can work separately on feature branches, where a feature branch is created from a master branch. After completion of changes, the feature branch is merged with the master branch.

The types of branches that can be present in GitFlow are:

• Master – Used for product release
• Develop – Used for ongoing development
• Feature Branching – branches off the develop branch to develop new features.
• Release – Assist in preparing a new production release and bug fixing, typically branched from the develop branch, and necessitating merges back into both develop and master branches.
• Hotfix – Hotfix branches aid in addressing discovered bugs swiftly, allowing developers to continue their work on the develop branch while the issue is resolved. Unlike release branches, hotfix branches are created from master branch specifically for critical bug resolution in the production release.

The Master and Develop branches are the main branches, and persist throughout the journey of the software. The other branches are essentially supporting branches and are short-lived.

Pros Of Gitflow

• Facilitates parallel development, ensuring production code stability while developers work on separate branches.
• Organizes work effectively with separate branches for specific purposes.
• Ideal for managing multiple versions of production code.
• GitFlow streamlines the release management process, expediting the rollout of new features and bug fixes.
• By advocating for feature-based development through individual branches, GitFlow fosters independent feature implementation. This approach allows seamless merging of features into the main codebase, minimizing conflicts.
• GitFlow offers a well-defined procedure for addressing bugs and deploying hotfixes, facilitating their rapid integration into production environments.

Cons Of Gitflow

• Complexity increases as more branches are added, potentially leading to difficulties in management.
• Merging changes from development branches to the main branch requires multiple steps, increasing the chance of errors and merge conflicts.
• Debugging issues becomes challenging due to the extensive commit history.
• GitFlow’s complexity may slow down the development process and release cycle, making it less suitable for continuous integration and continuous delivery.

GitHub Flow

GitHub flow is a simpler alternative to GitFlow, idea for smaller teams. GitHub flow only has feature branches that stem directly from the master branch and are merged back to master after completing changes. They don’t have release branches. The fundamental concept of this model revolves around maintaining the master code in a consistently deployable condition, thereby enabling the seamless implementation of faster release cycles, continuous integration and continuous delivery workflows.

The types of branches that can be present in GitFlow are:

• Master – The GitHub Flow workflow initiates with the master branch, housing the most recent stable code prepared for release.
• Feature – Developers initiate feature branches from the main branch to implement new features or address bugs. Upon completion, the feature branch is merged back into the main branch. If a merge conflict arises, developers are required to resolve it prior to finalizing the merge.

Pros Of Github Flow

• GitHub Flow emphasizes fast and streamlined branching, short production cycles, and frequent releases, aligning well with Agile methodologies.
• Teams can quickly identify and resolve issues due to the strategy’s focus on fast feedback loops.
• Testing and automating changes to a single branch enable quick and continuous deployment.
• GitHub Flow is particularly well-suited for small teams and web applications, where maintaining a single production version is sufficient.

Cons Of Github Flow

• GitHub Flow is not ideal for managing multiple versions of the codebase.
• The lack of development branches can lead to unstable production code if changes are not properly tested before merging.
• Without separate development branches, the master branch can become cluttered, serving both production and development purposes.
• As teams grow, merge conflicts may occur more frequently due to everyone merging changes to the same branch. Lack of transparency can exacerbate this issue, as developers may not see what others are working on.

GitLab Flow

GitLab flow is also an alternative to GitFlow, designed to be more robust and scalable than GitHub Flow. Designed for teams using GitLab, a web-based Git repository manager, this approach streamlines development by concentrating on a solitary, protected branch, usually the master branch. Continuous integration and automated testing form the core elements of GitLab Flow, guaranteeing the stability of the master branch.

The types of branches that can be present in GitFlow are:

• Master: Main production branch housing stable release ready code.
• Develop: Contains new features and bug fixes.
• Feature: Developers initiate feature branches from the develop branch to implement new features or address bugs. Upon completion, they integrate the changes from the feature branch into the develop branch.
• Release: Prior to a new release, a release branch is branched off from the develop branch. This release branch serves as a staging area for integrating new features and bug fixes intended for the upcoming release. Upon completion, developers merge the changes from the release branch into both the develop and main branches.

Pros Of Github Flow

• GitLab Flow offers a robust and scalable Git branching strategy, particularly suitable for larger teams and projects.
• This approach ensures a distinct separation between code under development and production-ready code, minimizing the risk of inadvertent changes to the production code.
• With GitLab Flow, each feature is developed in its own branch, promoting independent development and reducing conflicts during integration into the main codebase.
• The use of separate branches enables developers to work concurrently on different features, leading to quicker feature development.

Cons Of Github Flow

• GitLab Flow may pose challenges due to its complexity, particularly for teams new to Git.
• Merging feature branches into the develop branch can result in conflicts, as these branches may diverge from the develop branch over time.
• The GitLab Flow strategy may slow down development, as it necessitates merging changes into the develop branch before release. This could be problematic for teams requiring rapid release of new features and bug fixes.

Trunk Based Development

It is a branching strategy where developers work on a single “trunk” branch, mostly the master branch and use feature flags to isolate features until they are ready for release. This main branch should be ready for release any time. No additional branches are created. The main idea behind this strategy is to make smaller changes more frequently to avoid merge conflicts and the goal is to limit long-lasting branches. This strategy enables continuous integration and delivery, making it an attractive choice for teams aiming to release updates swiftly and frequently. It is particularly well-suited for smaller projects or teams seeking a streamlined workflow.

Pros Of Trunk Based Development

• Trunk-based development keeps the trunk consistently updated, enabling continuous integration of code changes.
• Developers have better visibility into each other’s changes as commits are made directly to the trunk, promoting collaboration and transparency.
• Without the need for branches, there is less likelihood of encountering merge conflicts or “merge hell,” as developers push small changes more frequently, simplifying conflict resolution.
• The shared trunk remains in a constant releasable state, allowing for faster and more stable releases due to the continuous integration of work.

Cons Of Trunk Based Development

• Trunk-based development requires a significant amount of autonomy and may be daunting for less experienced developers who interact directly with the shared trunk, hence it is suitable for senior developers.
• Trunk-based development demands a considerable level of discipline and effective communication among developers to prevent conflicts and ensure proper isolation of new features.
• Difficult to manage for large teams.
• Maintaining backward compatibility with older releases can also pose challenges.

Picking The Right Branching Strategy

Git offers a wide range of branching strategies, each suited to different project requirements and team dynamics. For beginners, starting with simpler approaches like GitHub Flow or Trunk-based development is recommended, gradually advancing to more complex strategies as needed. Feature flagging can also help reduce the necessity for excessive branching. GitFlow is beneficial for projects requiring strict access control, particularly in open-source environments. However, it may not align well with DevOps practices. Therefore, teams seeking an Agile DevOps workflow with strong support for continuous integration and delivery may find GitHub Flow or Trunk-based development more suitable. Ultimately, the choice of branching strategy depends on the specific needs and goals of the project and team.

Product Type	Team Size	Applicable Strategy
Continuous Deployment and Release	Small	GitHub Flow and TBD
Scheduled and Periodic Version Release	Medium	GitFlow and GitLab Flow
Continuous deployment for quality-focused products	Medium	GitLab Flow
Products with long maintenance cycles	Large	GitFlow

Branching Strategies – FAQ’s

Can I Use Multiple Git Branching Strategies In The Same Project?

While it’s possible, it’s not recommended as it can lead to confusion. Choose one strategy that best fits your project’s needs.

What Should I Do If My Feature Branch Conflicts With The Main Branch?

Resolve the conflicts locally by merging or rebasing your branch with the main branch.

How Often Should I Merge Changes Into The Main Branch?

It depends on your project’s workflow, but regular merges (e.g., daily or weekly) help maintain code stability.

Can I Delete Feature Branches After Merging Them Into The Main Branch?

Yes, it’s a good practice to clean up feature branches after merging to keep the repository tidy.

How Can I Ensure Code Quality Before Merging Branches?

Use code reviews, automated tests, and CI/CD pipelines to ensure that only high-quality code gets merged.