It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    In our environment Prod is only a holding area, the change/feature/bugfix is already approved for production, once the change is documented then the merge happens into main and Prod is consumed.

    Our “working” branches are ephemeral.

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yeah, we’re trying to avoid a lot of hanging branches with no documentation so we try to prune as much as possible. So we built pruning and documentation into the workflow of the pipeline.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Great! The best I’ve been able to do is document a best practice to default to deleting the source branch on merge. I actually just now finished writing a script to list all repos with various details including the setting about deleting source branches on merge. I’ll talk to a few teams about it, then see if I can get management approval to set it for all repos (you can click to override in the merge request so it seems harmless)