I'm working on a git workflow to implement in a small team. The core ideas in the workflow:There is a shared project master that all team members can write toAll development is done exclusively on feature branchesFeature branches are code reviewed by a team member other than the branch authorThe feature branch is eventually merged into the shared master and the cycle starts againThe article explains the steps in this cycle in detail:https://github.com/janosgyerik/git-workflows-book/blob/small-team-workflow/chapter05.mdDoes this make sense or am I missing something?
Git workflow for small teams
version control;git;teamwork;workflows
I like the git flow branching model. The master branch is left alone most of the time, it only contains releases. The develop branch should be stable at all times, and the feature branches can be broken.You can also combine this with continuous integration by merging develop into your feature branch and your feature branch into develop. Of course you should only merge something into develop when you're confident that things are working and do not break.