Why Your Git Workflow Matters

A Git workflow defines how your team collaborates on code. It determines how features are developed, how changes are reviewed, and how releases are managed. The wrong workflow creates friction, slows down delivery, and increases the chance of integration problems. The right workflow feels natural and keeps everyone moving forward.

There is no single best workflow. The right choice depends on your team size, release cadence, and the nature of your project.

Trunk-Based Development

In trunk-based development, all developers commit to a single main branch. Feature branches are short-lived, typically lasting no more than a day or two before being merged back. This approach prioritizes continuous integration and reduces merge conflicts by keeping branches small.

git checkout -b feature/add-search
# Make small, focused changes
git add .
git commit -m "Add search input component"
git push origin feature/add-search
# Open PR, get review, merge same day

Trunk-based development works well for teams with:

  • Strong automated testing and CI pipelines
  • A culture of small, incremental changes
  • Feature flags for managing incomplete work in production
  • Continuous deployment to production

The main risk is that incomplete features can reach production. Feature flags mitigate this by decoupling deployment from release.

GitHub Flow

GitHub Flow is a simplified branching model built around pull requests. Developers create feature branches from main, do their work, open a pull request for review, and merge back to main when approved. The main branch is always deployable.

This workflow adds slightly more structure than trunk-based development while remaining simple enough for most teams. It works particularly well for teams that:

  • Deploy frequently but want a review gate before merging
  • Need a clear code review process
  • Want a straightforward workflow with minimal ceremony

The key constraint is that main must always be in a deployable state. If a merge breaks something, fixing it takes priority over everything else.

GitFlow

GitFlow uses multiple long-lived branches: main for production releases, develop for integration, feature branches for new work, and release branches for preparing deployments. It provides a structured process for managing releases and hotfixes.

main ─────────────────────────────────────
  │                                    ↑
  └─ develop ──────────────────────────┤
       ├─ feature/search ──┘           │
       ├─ feature/auth ────┘           │
       └─ release/2.0 ────────────────┘

GitFlow is well-suited for projects with:

  • Scheduled releases rather than continuous deployment
  • Multiple versions maintained in production simultaneously
  • Large teams where integration requires coordination
  • Strict requirements around release management

The downside is complexity. The multiple branch types and merge paths create overhead that is unnecessary for teams that deploy continuously.

Code Review Practices

Regardless of which workflow you choose, effective code review is essential:

  • Keep pull requests small and focused on a single concern
  • Write descriptive PR titles and summaries that explain the why, not just the what
  • Review promptly to avoid blocking teammates
  • Use automated checks for formatting, linting, and tests so reviewers can focus on logic and design
  • Be constructive and specific in feedback

Choosing Your Workflow

Start with the simplest workflow that meets your needs. For most web development teams deploying frequently, GitHub Flow provides enough structure without unnecessary complexity. Add formality only when you encounter problems that a simpler workflow cannot solve. The best workflow is the one your team actually follows consistently.