git-flow

I want to make the pull request merge into develop from the feature branch by default. I'm advocating the use of git flow, so when a pull request is submitted for a feature, the pull request needs to get merged into develop, and not master. Some of the managers commented that being human, there is a possibility that the team leads could overlook that fact and merge the pull request into master by mistake, causing issues with the release later on. We want to mitigate the risks of merge hell so this would go a long way in achieving this goal. Edit: I'm using a fork of gitflow called hubflow(

I'm completely confused about what mine vs theirs means. In this specific case, I've got a feature branch where I just squashed about 80 commits via rebase -i and am merging this back into develop . I got a few conflicts, and I just want to use whatever code is on my feature branch. I tried "mine" but that actually seemed to do the opposite. Could someone shed some light on this terminology? ours and theirs is a somewhat confusing concept; exacerbated when performing a rebase: When performing a merge, ours refers to the branch you're merging into , and theirs refers to the branch you are

Are any large software projects using git-flow and, if so, how is it going? (See http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ and http://jeffkreeftmeijer.com/2010/why-arent-you-using-git-flow/ ) I've introduced git flow in our team this week and am using it myself for a few weeks now and I absolutely love it. It makes branching and merging back so much easier. It can all be done with default git but git flow makes it so much easier and the branching model is fairly easy to understand and explain to new team members. I'm all pro Introduced to a 4 developers team last week. Seems to

After git flow init , how to remove git flow model? Even, I removed related config from .git/config file. $ git flow init # force reset $ git flow init -f Already remove below content from .git/config file. [gitflow "branch"] master = master develop = develop [gitflow "prefix"] feature = feature/ release = release/ hotfix = hotfix/ support = support/ versiontag = Thanks. You can do what @Peter said from the command line too! Those commands remove all the sections of the git config file related to gitflow. git config --remove-section "gitflow.path" git config --remove-section "gitflow.prefix"

We have a developer team of 4 and have recently moved to Git. We want to learn best practices regarding workflow with branching and merging. We are using a lightweight version of Git Flow. We have a dev, staging and a master branch which are all linear with each other. staging is branched from master dev is branched from staging On top of that we use feature and hotfix branches to work on new features and fix bugs. I have the following questions: Should we branch feature branches from dev or from master? When a feature branch is ready, should we merge the feature branch into dev, then merge

I have seen multiple contradicting definitions on various git flow related websites. Is there an official recommendation or single source of truth? Branches: release-1.2.3 or release-v1.2.3 Tags: 1.2.3 or v1.2.3 TimWolla Well, basically it is a matter of preference, but I prefer the version with the v , as Semver does it that way and I try to follow that specification as close as possible to get a sane versioning. It also makes filtering for those Tags easier, as you can press v and then the TAB -key for autocompletion: This will list all the tags (and maybe a few branches), whereas there are

I have a release branch named release/X.X.X.X which contains all feature branches I want to deploy to production. The release branch is made on top of master which is the current state of production. On every release day I make sure our release branch contains only those changes planned for the release. I use this command to compare the release and master branch: git log release/X.X.X.X ^master --no-merges . I then manually check the commits for keywords like "SHR-1234" which represent ticket numbers in our ticket management system. I need to compare each commit with a list of ticket numbers

Git flow概述 Git flow是最早产生, 也是得到广深采用的的一种工作流程, 他的分支管理策略非常值得借鉴, 很大程度上避免了Git分支管理的混乱. 项目存在两个长期分支 主分支 master 开发分支 develop 项目存在三个临时分支 功能分支 feature 补丁分支 hotfix 预发布分支 release 开发完成后, 它们会被合并进develop或master, 然后删除. 工作流程 主分支 master 用于正式发布, 应该是被锁定的, 不能做此分支上做任何的修改. 一直保持处于Production-Ready状态. 开发分支 develop 主开发分支, 用于日常开发, 包含所有要发布到下一个Release的代码, 主要用来合并与其他分支, 比如feature分支. 创建develop分支 git checkout -b develop master 将develop分支合并到master分支 # 切换到master分支 git checkout master # 对develop分支进行合并 git merge --no-ff develop 功能分支 feature 在develop分支上创建, 开发完成后, 再并入develop. 创建一个功能分支: git checkout -b feature-abc develop 开发完成后,

Sometimes I need (in order to make my development faster) harcode some stuff in my code. That can be credentials, or maybe just a hack to allow me to test certain feature. For many reasons, I never want to push this code to the main codebase or even the development branch. For some time I've been using the 'git-assume-unchaged' command but after merges, rebases, etc that can get mixed up and you might be pushing something you don't want. Is there a cool clean way to achieve this? maybe some command that warns me that I have to remember to checkout some file before pushing or something like