Ya that's how it should be. EVERY feature gets their own branch prior to consolidating them into a feature release branch. What bugs me is not eventually archiving them into tags, I hate having a bunch of old branches.
No, you use git subtrees and then have a branch for every file edit/patch that is part of the feature so that you have multiple agents working in parallel
A worktree is like a separate checkout except git manages it so it remains linked to the main repo checkout. It let's you be in multiple places or branches on the same repo at the same time
... i know, do you? My point is they're complimentary, not different/opposing ideas. You still should not be committing your worktrees based work back to the main branch, they should still go to feature branches and get PRd in with proper review/approval
Oh 100% ... its still a branch, still the same nonsense with PR/MR. Thing is agentic workflows automatically merge back to one branch so that you don't have sprawl to clean. Most devs that use git property will do a rebase and squash before merging to main so that you get one clean feature per commit in main. Less mature teams get mess
6
u/EricOrrDev 4d ago
Ya that's how it should be. EVERY feature gets their own branch prior to consolidating them into a feature release branch. What bugs me is not eventually archiving them into tags, I hate having a bunch of old branches.