![]() Simpler rules: With Git Flow, your developers have to follow a specific set of rules to be able to manage the code and the projects.Some of the other factors that make GitHub Flow a better option than Git Flow include: ![]() After review and verification of the feature in the new branch, you’ll then merge it to the master branch, which is always deployable. After you deliver the code changes to create the new feature, you will request a code review from the team by initiating a pull request. When creating new features, you will create a new branch. Rather than using several branches for specific tasks like Git Flow uses, GitHub Flow reduces the number of branches in use. ![]() In fact, the primary advantage of GitHub Flow over Git Flow is its lack of complexity. GitHub Flow’s appearance a few years after Git Flow aimed to simplify the use of Git branching strategies through a less complex process than Git Flow deployed. For coding projects involving apps and web services, the complexity of Git Flow was unnecessary. ![]() Although Git Flow fulfilled its original purpose of giving those new to Git an ability to learn how to use Git’s branching model quickly, its complexity frustrated some users. GitHub Flow initially came about as an answer to try to solve the complexity of Git Flow, which originally appeared in 2010. GitHub Flow comparison, it’s important to understand both strategies, so you and your team can pick the best option for the particular type of coding you are doing. Selecting between these two strategies is important for making sure that your development team is on the same page and is implementing multiple coding changes effectively. When looking to make use of a Git branching strategy for working on your team’s coding project, you usually will be selecting between Git Flow and GitHub Flow. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |