git repo architecture 

I've got a doozy of a git repo architecture question to get resolved before my current setup is inflicted on my teammates: softwareengineering.stackexcha

It struck me just a bit after posting that that maybe the best solution is a single large repo where I can move items around freely and version the whole set instead of each function app. 馃

Web 1 0 0

git repo architecture 

@melissa yeah, from long painful experience, i have 2 thoughts here:

1. the main one - i think you're right to think "one big repo" for this kind of thing. submodule-heavy workflows get cumbersome pretty fast.

2. a sidebar: i tend to think gitflow-like workflows make things unnecessarily complicated, and strongly prefer just merging feature branches to main, with either tags for versions or (we do this at wikimedia) branches for deployed versions that get backports.

git repo architecture 

@brennen Awesome, thank you! I'm probably going to start the joys of combining these repos later today. Fun, fun.

re: gitflow-likes: yeah, I hear you on that, esp on smaller, rapidly-deployed work. My day job does feature branches + env branches to move features towards prod. That's not the worst and makes the state of our apps very clear for devs, but when you add PRs for 3 out of 4 environments, it seems like small features require more time on code mgmt than coding. 馃槄

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!