add guidance on git branching strategies

[microsoft]

add guidance on git branching strategies

[fnocera]

Hi @maniSbindra!
Thanks for adding this issue - I would suggest writing some of this content and adding it here https://github.com/microsoft/code-with-engineering-playbook/tree/master/source-control/feature-branching.

[aguywithcode]

Most of the concerns listed in the linked article are due to a lack of understanding of how gitflow works. It looks like he's in a process heavy environment that adds restrictions to git flow that aren't inherently there. Nothing about git flow requires a gatekeeper for merging into the develop branch. Even during greenfield development, git flow is beneficial because it allows for collaboration on work in progress without impacting the integration branch. In addition segregating the integration branch from master, allows master to be a "source of truth". Unless there are objections, the playbook guidance will default to git flow as the preferred branching strategy.

[maniSbindra]

Hi @aguywithcode I totally agree, We have gone with Gitflow in most of our engagements without any issues. In my opinion, In the guidance we can suggest the default option as you mentioned and then perhaps mention certain conditions when perhaps one might want to consider other flows (like for certain generic OSS components like https://github.com/microsoft/azure-databricks-operator using the standard GitHub flow).

[TessFerrandez]

Closing due to lack of activity - feel free to reopen if someone wants to write something on this