🚀 Feature Branching Considered Evil (Thierry de Pauw )

Testing

Learn why feature branching is considered evil and how trunk-based development offers a better approach, with faster feedback and integration, improving code quality and reliability.

Key takeaways

Feature branching is considered evil because it introduces complexity, makes integration harder, and can lead to broken builds.
Trunk-based development is a better approach, where everyone commits directly to the mainline branch, allowing for faster feedback and integration.
Feature toggles can be used to control the quality of new features, but they can also introduce complexity and make it harder to maintain the codebase.
Automated testing and continuous integration are essential for ensuring the quality of the codebase.
Code reviews are important for ensuring that the code meets the required standards, but they should not be used to catch bugs.
Pair programming and mob programming can help to improve code quality and reduce errors.
Continuous delivery is important for ensuring that the software is always working and that changes are deployed quickly and reliably.
Branching logic needs to be tested to ensure that it works correctly.
Feature branching can lead to a “vicious circle” of complexity, where changes are made in isolation and then merged into the mainline branch, making it harder to integrate and test the changes.
The author suggests using “branch by abstraction” as an alternative to feature branching, where changes are made in isolation but are still integrated into the mainline branch in small increments.
The author also suggests using “string-based development” as an alternative to feature branching, where changes are made in isolation but are still integrated into the mainline branch in small increments.
The author emphasizes the importance of incremental software engineering skills in the team, and suggests that this is often lacking in teams that use feature branching.
The author also emphasizes the importance of communication and collaboration in the team, and suggests that this is often lacking in teams that use feature branching.
The author suggests that feature branching is often used as a way to avoid the complexity of integrating changes into the mainline branch, but this can lead to a “vicious circle” of complexity.
The author suggests that trunk-based development is a better approach, where everyone commits directly to the mainline branch, allowing for faster feedback and integration.
The author emphasizes the importance of continuous delivery and continuous integration in ensuring that the software is always working and that changes are deployed quickly and reliably.
The author suggests that feature branching can lead to a “vicious circle” of complexity, where changes are made in isolation and then merged into the mainline branch, making it harder to integrate and test the changes.
The author emphasizes the importance of incremental software engineering skills in the team, and suggests that this is often lacking in teams that use feature branching.
The author suggests that trunk-based development is a better approach, where everyone commits directly to the mainline branch, allowing for faster feedback and integration.
The author emphasizes the importance of continuous delivery and continuous integration in ensuring that the software is always working and that changes are deployed quickly and reliably.

🚀 Feature Branching Considered Evil (Thierry de Pauw )

More talks