Comments by "" (@defeqel6537) on "Continuous Integration vs Feature Branch Workflow" video.

@_skyyskater I know I would struggle to make the changes small and coherent enough, especially if the assumption is that each change needs to be reviewed, as that would basically break every developer's day into very small sections of coding and reviewing, but that breaks concentration.
19
@FlaviusAspra there is a clear difference between "should" and "must", sometimes longer living branches are inevitable. Admittedly they are probably more common than necessary.
5
Tests should be written on the feature-level, the implementation details don't matter. This is not always possible, but I'd say in 99% of cases it is. Not that I'm convinced that branches should be avoided, but I do think that frequent merging would be useful (again, in 99% of cases), but needs to be done right.
1
@Mio2k10 I agree, and disagree. Generally, yeah, fully refined increments should be preferred, but as long as it is flagged out, or similar, I'm starting to see a benefit with WIP state changes being merged too. I do think merging WIP requires care though, otherwise may lead to just frustrating your team members. As for testing, my point was that the tests (usually) shouldn't rely on what the code looks like, so they may be written quite early on, after a bit of planning. As for test types, I prefer unit tests, by which I mean code I control the inputs and outputs for. IMO people should avoid micro-testing, where they try to test each function or class separately (unless those are your deliverables, in which case thoroughly test them).
1