Branching Strategies for CI/CD Success

Ever feel like your codebase is a messy kitchen after a big dinner rush? Imagine if every chef had their own recipe note—and sometimes they mixed up ingredients. That’s what managing code without a good branching strategy can feel like. Here, we will explore two popular approaches—GitHub Flow and Trunk-Based Development—and show you how to blend them into a hybrid that works for teams of all sizes.

Disclaimer! Branching strategies are pivotal to how development teams collaborate, manage code changes, and ultimately deliver high-quality software.  I have also found many teams follow complex branching strategies based on their team competencies and types of products & technologies. The branching strategy also will be influenced by the existing automation, product release cycle, process, and culture of the team.  Also, every branching strategy has its own Pros and Cons. However, I will be discussing the method suitable for most of the teams. 

Introduction

Whether you are a developer, an engineer, or just a curious professional, understanding the way code is managed can be as simple as following a good recipe. In this post, we’ll cover:

• What are GitHub Flow and Trunk-Based Development?
• How do they work in real life?
• Simple branch naming and build versioning tips
• Different types of builds for your CI/CD pipeline

Think of GitHub Flow like ordering at your favorite fast-food joint—quick, simple, and efficient. Meanwhile, Trunk-Based Development is like a bustling kitchen where all the chefs add their touch to one giant stew, making sure it’s always ready to serve. We’ll break these concepts down, compare them side-by-side, and even include a quick code snippet for our tech-savvy readers.

Understanding GitHub Flow

GitHub Flow is a lightweight, feature-branch-based workflow that emphasizes simplicity, pull requests (PRs), and rapid deployments. Key steps in the GitHub Flow include:

1. Create a Feature Branch: Start with a new branch off the main branch for each new feature or bug fix.
2. Make Changes & Commit: Develop your feature, committing incremental changes.
3. Open a Pull Request: Request code reviews and automated testing via CI pipelines.
4. Review & Merge: After approval, merge the feature branch back into main.
5. Deploy Immediately: Use CI/CD pipelines to deploy the updated main branch into production.

Ideal For:

• Small to medium-sized teams
• Cloud-native or SaaS projects that benefit from frequent releases
• Workflows that favor structured, review-based deployments

Understanding Trunk-Based Development (TBD)

Key Steps Include:

1. Direct Commits or Short-Lived Branches: Developers work on the trunk with very short-lived feature branches if needed.
2. Continuous Integration: Each commit triggers automated tests to ensure the trunk is always in a releasable state.
3. Feature Flags: Incomplete features are controlled by feature toggles, enabling safe deployment.
4. Frequent Deployments: The system supports multiple commits per day, promoting high agility.

Ideal For:

• Large teams requiring rapid integration
• High-frequency release environments like microservices architectures
• Organizations fully committed to DevOps and automated testing practices

GitHub Flow vs. Trunk-Based Development: A Comparison

Recommended Naming Conventions & Build Versioning

Standardizing branch naming and build versioning conventions is key to clarity and traceability in any development workflow.

Branch Naming Conventions

A consistent naming strategy improves collaboration, readability, and traceability. Below is a table outlining typical branch naming conventions for both GitHub Flow and TBD (when using short-lived branches):

For teams practicing Trunk-Based Development, the naming is less critical due to the emphasis on direct commits, but short-lived branch names should still follow the above conventions to maintain clarity.

Build Versioning

Build versioning ties your software releases back to the codebase in a structured manner. Semantic Versioning is commonly used:

• Format: MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH
  
  • MAJOR: Introduces incompatible API changes.
  • MINOR: Adds functionality in a backward-compatible manner.
  • PATCH: Makes backward-compatible bug fixes.
• Additional Build Metadata: Often appended as a build number or commit hash, for example, 2.3.0+build.4567 or 2.3.0 (commit abc1234).

These conventions allow teams to track changes, facilitate rollbacks, and ensure that every build can be uniquely identified.

Types of Software Builds

The choice of software builds is directly tied to the branching strategy and the overall CI/CD requirements. Here are several types of builds and their purposes:

Different build types ensure that at each stage—from development to production—you have the appropriate level of validation and quality assurance.

Hybrid Approach: Combining GitHub Flow & Trunk-Based Development

For mid-to-large companies and complex projects, a hybrid approach can blend the best of both worlds:

1. Main Branch as the Source of Truth: Use main for production-ready code.
2. Short-Lived Feature Branches: Developers create feature branches for significant changes and merge them quickly to avoid drift.
3. Feature Flags: Use toggles to safely integrate incomplete features into the main branch.
4. Targeted Pull Request Reviews: Reserve PR reviews for critical, high-risk, or complex changes while smaller fixes can be merged directly.
5. Automated CI/CD Pipelines: Enforce rigorous automated testing and versioning, ensuring each build (developer, integration, nightly, etc.) meets quality standards.
6. Release Branches (Optional): For major releases, temporary branches can be maintained for final integration and testing.

This hybrid model allows teams to balance speed with stability, ensuring that every code change is both well-reviewed and rapidly deployed.

CI/CD Requirements for Different Branching Strategies

Each strategy demands a tailored CI/CD setup to maximize efficiency:

Conclusion

Choosing the right branching strategy depends on team size, release frequency, and overall development complexity:

• GitHub Flow is optimal for teams that prefer a structured, review-based process with controlled deployments.
• Trunk-Based Development excels in high-velocity environments with continuous integration and rapid release cycles.
• A Hybrid Approach is particularly well-suited for mid-to-large companies that need a balance between code quality and fast delivery, combining rigorous testing, versioning, and clear branch naming conventions.

By adopting clear naming conventions, a robust versioning scheme, and the right mix of build types, organizations can tailor their development workflow to enhance collaboration, minimize risk, and achieve consistent, high-quality releases. After all, in the world of CI/CD, it’s not just about working hard—it’s about working smart (and occasionally with a bit of humor to keep the team motivated)!

More Details/References 

https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com/

https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/using-github/github-flow

Images sources/credits:

https://github.com/SvanBoxel/release-based-workflow/issues/1

https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com/