This was terrible at the time and it remains terrible now. Extremely few teams need this level of complexity and some parts of it – like the redundant long-lived develop branch – are pointless safety blankets. It seems to have only caught on because a lot of people felt adrift when it comes to Git and this was written far too authoritatively for what it is. I’ve seen so many small teams tie themselves up wasting time working for Git Flow that I think this might actually be the worst thing to ever happen to version control. I’m glad the author has mostly walked it back, but unfortunately the damage has been done.
If you are putting a team together and haven’t picked a Git workflow and are unsure what to do, start with something simple like trunk-based development and add complexity if and when you encounter problems that justify it.
If you are putting a team together and haven’t picked a Git workflow and are unsure what to do, start with something simple like trunk-based development and add complexity if and when you encounter problems that justify it.
https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com
Previous discussions:
Please stop recommending Gitflow: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22485489
GitFlow considered harmful: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9744059
The problem with Git Flow: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23622071