Developer's Wet Dreams. Trunk-based Development and its Caveats

?? Foreword

In the wild world of software development, two branching strategies duke it out for supremacy: Git Flow and Trunk-Based Development.?

Git Flow often wins, but only because of its simplicity. On paper, Git Flow offers a tidy, multi-branch system that promises safety and order.?

Trunk-Based Development(see image below), on the other hand, is all about rapid integration and continuous delivery.

But as any seasoned IT-person knows, reality often has a wicked sense of humor. Let’s take a cheeky, no-holds-barred look at why Git Flow can be a double-edged sword and why, without proper discipline, Trunk-Based Development might just turn your codebase into a comedy of errors.

??? Git Flow VS Trunk-Based Development

Choosing a branching strategy is as crucial as picking the right coffee to survive your morning meetings. Git Flow promises structure by splitting your work into neat branches for features, releases, and hotfixes. Trunk-Based Development, in contrast, urges you to live on the edge by pushing frequent, small updates directly to the main branch.

Let’s make a brief comparison (of course, subjective)

As you can see both methods have their charms and their quirks—if you know what pitfalls to avoid, you might just come out unscathed.

??? Why I Dislike Git Flow

Despite its well-organized appearance, Git Flow often ends up being more trouble than it’s worth. Here are my points:

• The Illusion of Security and Slack Testing

Git Flow gives you the false sense of security that comes with multiple branches. You might think, “I’m covered on all fronts!” But that safety net can make teams complacent—testing becomes an afterthought, and soon you’re bolting on tests like duct tape on a sinking ship.????

• ?Massive Feature Commits and Half-Hearted Reviews

Picture this: one developer works solo on an enormous feature and then drops a giant commit into the review queue. Colleagues, dazzled by the sheer size of the commit (and perhaps a bit too trusting), simply stamp an "LGTM" without a second glance—hoping that Aunt Tanya, your manual tester, will catch all the gremlins later. When production inevitably gets hit by bugs, everyone points fingers, but no one really knew what they were approving.????

• Merge Conflicts: A Team’s Worst Nightmare

Imagine two brilliant (or, let’s be honest, occasionally clueless) team members developing huge features destined for the same release. One gets merged first, leaving the other to battle an avalanche of merge conflicts that seem to last an eternity. What should be a smooth integration turns into an epic struggle that drains time, energy, and perhaps even a bit of your sanity.????

• Pre-Release Panic and the Dreaded Last-Minute Scramble

As release time looms, the whole team gets a not-so-friendly reminder of all the questionable code that found its way into master. Suddenly, everyone’s on high alert—manual testing kicks into overdrive, bugs surface, and the release slips, turning a Friday into a weekend-long nightmare. Deadlines? They become a fond memory of what could have been.???

• Code Reviews: The “LGTM” Culture

There’s a peculiar phenomenon in Git Flow where code reviews morph into mere formality. A quick “LGTM” is often all it takes, even when the code might be hiding the last shred of hope for a bright future. The result? A parade of approvals without genuine scrutiny, leaving your repository vulnerable to hidden flaws.????

• Code Style Chaos and Neglected Best Practices

Let’s face it—when you’re juggling multiple branches, someone’s bound to slack off on code style. Red flags pile up, and instead of a clean, consistent codebase, you get a patchwork of mismatched styles that scream for attention (and refactoring).????

• The Neglect of Pipelines and Architectural Discipline

Once teams start relying on the “safety” of Git Flow, essential processes like pre-commit hooks, automated pipelines, and architectural reviews often take a back seat. Explaining their importance to a client becomes like convincing someone to enjoy Brussels sprouts—everyone knows it’s good for you, but nobody’s too thrilled about it.????♂?

??? Why You Might Struggle with Trunk-Based Development

Now, before you start chanting “Trunk is the future!” let’s talk about the pitfalls when this approach isn’t executed with military precision:

• Inexperience and the “Can’t Tell a Fork from a Spoon” Syndrome

If your team includes junior developers who might struggle to tell a semicolon from a colon, trunk-based development can quickly turn into a disaster. One small error could cause a production incident.????

• Trust Fall on Code Styling and Automation

You might have all agreed on a stellar code style, and everyone’s trust is sky-high—until someone (team lead maybe?) forgets to set up a linter or pre-commit hook to swap blind trust with obligations. Without these automated checks, even the best intentions can lead to a codebase that’s more hodgepodge than harmony.????

• The Perils of Missing Feature Toggles

Imagine pushing code directly to production without feature toggles. One slip, and an unfinished feature goes live, wreaking havoc and leaving your users with nothing but disappointment—a scenario that would make even your mom shake her head in disapproval.????

• Overlooked Pull Requests and Rogue Commits

In a high-speed trunk-based world, the pressure to merge can lead to neglected peer reviews. When everyone is too busy pushing changes, that one rogue commit might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.??♂???

• Unrestricted Master Pushes: A Recipe for Disaster

Allowing direct pushes to master without at least one peer’s nod is akin to handing the keys of a Ferrari to someone who’s never driven before. It’s fun until it isn’t—fast.????

• The Danger of Missing Integration Tests

Without proper integration tests, minor tweaks can unleash a domino effect of bugs. What starts as a small oversight quickly snowballs into an avalanche of issues that no one saw coming. Or do you always know where the thin line is?????

• The Need for a Stern, Automated Pipeline

If you haven’t invested in an automated pipeline that mercilessly flags errors, failed tests, or linting mishaps, you’re practically inviting chaos. A silent, error-blinking pipeline is your best friend when it comes to keeping the codebase pristine.???

??? Lessons learned from Trunk-Based experience

• React Native Applications: Gold Over Leprechaun Treasure

For React Native apps, a rock-solid CI/CD pipeline with comprehensive testing is worth its weight in gold—probably more than any leprechaun’s treasure. Nevertheless It’s not just a nice-to-have; it’s an absolute must for surviving in the mobile arena. But for God's sake set it up carefully.????

• Fast Push-Fixes: Your Lifeline in Crisis

In the realm of React Native, enabling rapid push-fixes is non-negotiable. When fixes are required, having a streamlined process can mean the difference between a minor hiccup and a full-blown user revolt. Save yourself the headache and keep those emergency doors open.????

• Git Flow farewell kick. Propensity for long commits

Add a feature flag and keep it small, keep it nice, keep it sweet. Large, monolithic commits are a developer’s worst nightmare. By breaking your work into small, incremental commits, you minimize merge conflicts, simplify code reviews, and make it easier to track down the source of bugs. Think of it as portion control for your code.????

• Educate Newcomers Relentlessly

Invest time in onboarding new team members. Don’t get tired of explaining how everything is set up—even if you feel like a broken record. Monitor their progress closely during the first few weeks to ensure they adopt the team's best practices and don’t inadvertently cause chaos.????

• Document and Share Your Processes

Create a comprehensive document outlining your team’s processes and best practices. Hand it over to every newcomer as soon as they join. This not only minimizes confusion but also helps set expectations from day one.????

??? Afterword

?? Both Git Flow and Trunk-Based Development have their merits and missteps.

Git Flow’s structured approach might seem like a fortress, but it can lull teams into a false sense of security, leading to massive, unmanageable commits and last-minute release chaos.?

On the flip side, Trunk-Based Development champions speed and continuous integration—but only if you’ve got robust processes, strict automation, and a team that doesn’t mistake a semicolon for a decorative flourish.????

For decision-making persons, the key is to understand your team’s strengths (and weaknesses) and to invest heavily in automation, rigorous code reviews, and solid testing practices. Also enforce developers to check and help each other. Whether you choose the seemingly safe harbor of Git Flow or the high-speed express lane of Trunk-Based Development, remember: no strategy is foolproof. Embrace the chaos with a healthy dose of discipline—and maybe a touch of humor.????

But above all, do everything with common sense. Tailor your processes to fit your project and your team’s realities.

?? Example: Even though the Trunk-Based Development approach doesn’t inherently require pull requests and their reviews, I personally feel much more at ease when one experienced developer writes code and another reviews it. In a team of 10, if at least one person takes a look, that’s already a significant safety net. Adapt and evolve your strategy to what works best for you—because at the end of the day, flexibility and smart adjustments are what keep your code (and your sanity) intact.