question regarding git branches

[Conrad Meyer]

Hi Jason,

I believe the plan at this time is to use a single branch, rebase&push
workflow initially.  This is basically the same model as our
Subversion workflow, so it is more of a 1:1 transition.  Afterwards,
we might transition to a PR+merge model.  I think the long-term
workflow is still undecided.

This is just my best understanding and someone on the Git team
probably knows better.

Best regards,
Conrad

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:17 PM <jgh at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am a little late to the dance with git in respect to FreeBSD (haven't
> been following as much as I would like to given availability), but have
> been using it for awhile now at work and personally. With the recent
> migration from svn to git for documentation I saw that there was only
> one branch named "main." I think this is great that we also went with
> this name.
>
> My question more so is around workflow. Typically, it is seen as good
> practice to commit to a new branch and then merge to the main branch. Is
> this something that is being done as part of the commit process, or are
> commits being done straight to main branch?
>
> I'm not sure I need to go into the reasoning of having multiple branches
> and what that can do insofar as community and mentoring support,
> development CI/CD pipelines, etc. If this conversation goes down this
> path, though, I would be more than happy to discuss along with others.
>
> Thanks in advance!
> -jgh