Comparing Trunk-Based Development with Gitflow

When it comes to branching strategies in software development, two popular options are Trunk-Based Development and Gitflow. Both have their pros and cons, and which one you choose will depend on the needs of your team and project. In this post, we’ll take a closer look at each strategy and compare them in terms of their benefits and drawbacks.

Trunk-Based Development

Trunk-Based Development involves working on a single branch (usually called “trunk” or “master”) and making frequent, small commits. This allows for rapid integration and feedback, as changes are merged into the main branch as soon as they’re ready. Here’s a diagram to illustrate:

graph LR
  A((Developer)) --> B[Trunk]
  B --> C[Build/Test]
  C --> D(Merge)
  D --> B
  D --> E[Release]

Benefits

• Clarity: Trunk-Based Development is a simple and straightforward strategy that’s easy to understand. There’s only one main branch, so it’s clear where the latest and greatest version of the code is located.
• Visibility: Changes are merged into the main branch as soon as they’re ready, which provides greater visibility into the state of the codebase. Developers can see the impact of their changes immediately and prevent code conflicts and merge issues.
• CI Tooling: Trunk-Based Development is well-suited for continuous integration (CI) and delivery (CD) pipelines, as changes are merged frequently and often. This allows for early detection and resolution of issues, reducing the risk of code regressions and release delays.

Drawbacks

• Risk of Regression: With frequent changes being made to the main branch, there’s a higher risk of introducing regressions into the codebase. This risk can be mitigated through effective testing and code review processes.
• Lack of Isolation: Because all developers are working on the same branch, there’s less isolation between changes. This can make it more challenging to manage parallel releases or complex projects.

Gitflow

Gitflow is a more complex branching strategy that involves multiple long-lived branches, including a development branch, release branches, and hotfix branches. Here’s a diagram to illustrate:

graph LR
    A((Developer)) --> B[Feature]
    B --> C((Code Review))
    C --> B
    B --> D[Development]
    D --> E((Integration Testing))
    E --> F[Release]
    F --> G((UAT))
    G --> H(Merge)
    H --> E
    F --> I[Master]
    I --> J((Prod Deploy))
    J --> K[Release]
    K --> L((UAT))
    L --> M(Hotfix)
    M --> N(Merge)
    N --> K
    M --> O[Master]
    O --> P((Prod Deploy))

Benefits

• Clarity: Gitflow provides a clear structure for managing code changes and releases. This can make it easier for developers and stakeholders to understand the state of the codebase and how changes are being managed.
• Visibility: Gitflow separates new features from stable releases, which can help prevent conflicts and merge issues. It also provides a clear path for releases, with release branches used for testing and preparing releases and hotfix branches used for emergency fixes.
• CI Tooling: Gitflow’s structure can make it easier to manage parallel releases, with separate release branches used for different versions of the codebase.

Drawbacks

• Complexity: Gitflow can be more complex and time-consuming to implement than Trunk-Based Development. The multiple branches and release cycles can be challenging