Comments by "" (@redtela) on "Continuous Integration vs Feature Branch Workflow" video.

  1. Exactly! I mean, just take the argument that branching is "hiding" implementations and therefore cannot be continuous integration... equally, Dark Launching (or Blue/Green) hides the implementation from being in the Production system. The whole "don't branch" thing (and then going on to say that we should minimise branches) just pushes the problem(s) elsewhere in the development pipeline, just so we can continue to use the term "continuous integration." I'm happy to just have "semi-continuous" integration, I don't see why me or my team should be under any pressure to continually put things into Production.
    4
  2.  @ped7g  that "difference" (or lack thereof) simply tells me that the advice of "don't branch" is just a synonym of "make it someone else's problem." At some point, we all must take some form of acceptable risk. We follow gitflow (at my insistence), and so, we use feature branches. We also use unit tests, pull requests, integration tests, regression tests, manual QA and UAT. We use Pair Programming, BDD, TDD, and other methods. We have well over 1000 components in the system, each probably has 17 different "versions of the truth" and a hotfix can leave a developer laptop and arrive in Production within 30mins. Could we do it better? Sure. Are we "statistically producing worse code than if we didn't branch" - I doubt it. Could we release faster by not branching? Possibly, possibly not. Do we "hide" information from other developers? No, because a pushed commit can be pulled into any branch, at any time.
    3