Workflow

[Badrpas]

Let's discuss workflow here.
Is it Git Flow? Is it something different or more sophisticated?

Anyway, when it will get clear, it should be documented for future reference.

[BondarenkoArtur]

I think git flow is fine

[pavart]

Need to agree on merge strategy.
https://help.github.com/en/articles/about-merge-methods-on-github
Personally, I prefer squash merge commits. It will keep our master clean and informative.
Any preferences/objections?

[Badrpas]

Also for accepted pull requests i would suggest use of Rebase and merge strategy

[Badrpas]

Personally, I prefer squash merge commits. It will keep our master clean and informative.

What are downsides of each one?

[BondarenkoArtur]

Personally, I prefer squash merge commits. It will keep our master clean and informative.

I offer to use squash only for merging into alpha/beta/release branches (and master ofc)
For develop branch, let's just use regular merge without squashing

[pavart]

I'm not sure if we even need develop and alpha/beta/release branches.
I think we can start by having only master and feature branches.
Releases can be tagged on the master branch.
Providing that we will have CI and unit tests coverage - that should be enough.
In case we face issues/limitations of this approach - we can switch to "full git flow".

[Badrpas]

Let's stick to @pavart's approach for now.
Following Git Flow does not much sense in current state.

And for merge strategy - i think squashing is ok since we still have access to hidden commits if needed.

[BondarenkoArtur]

Agreed for squashing. Also good idea to have PR number into commit after merge

[pavart]

Any discussions yet?
Closing the issue?

[Badrpas]

Will close it after corresponding document is added.

[pavart]

In this case, please create this document.