What is a typical Git branching strategy for a small development team?

What is a typical Git branching strategy for a small development team?

• A. Main for release, development for ongoing work, feature branches for new tasks, with merges via pull requests.
• B. Merge everything directly into main as soon as code is written.
• C. Keep each feature in a separate repository.
• D. Use only hotfix branches for all changes.

Answer: (A)

The idea being tested is using a straightforward, stable branching model that protects production-ready code while keeping ongoing work organized and reviewable. In this setup, the main branch holds code that is release-ready, while a development branch gathers all in-progress work from feature branches. Each new task or feature gets its own feature branch created from the development branch, so work is isolated and won’t disrupt other tasks. When a feature is finished and tested, a pull request is opened to merge it back into development. This review process, plus automated checks, helps catch issues early and keeps a clean history of changes. As features land in development, the team can bundle them together and prepare for a release by merging development into main and tagging the release. This flow makes it easier for a small team to work in parallel on multiple features, maintain code quality through reviews, and have a clear, auditable path from feature work to release. In contrast, merging everything directly into main eliminates review and stability safeguards, while alternatives like keeping each task in separate repositories add unnecessary complexity. Relying only on hotfix branches would also miss the ongoing feature work that needs to be integrated before releases.

The idea being tested is using a straightforward, stable branching model that protects production-ready code while keeping ongoing work organized and reviewable. In this setup, the main branch holds code that is release-ready, while a development branch gathers all in-progress work from feature branches. Each new task or feature gets its own feature branch created from the development branch, so work is isolated and won’t disrupt other tasks. When a feature is finished and tested, a pull request is opened to merge it back into development. This review process, plus automated checks, helps catch issues early and keeps a clean history of changes.

As features land in development, the team can bundle them together and prepare for a release by merging development into main and tagging the release. This flow makes it easier for a small team to work in parallel on multiple features, maintain code quality through reviews, and have a clear, auditable path from feature work to release. In contrast, merging everything directly into main eliminates review and stability safeguards, while alternatives like keeping each task in separate repositories add unnecessary complexity. Relying only on hotfix branches would also miss the ongoing feature work that needs to be integrated before releases.