Skip to main content

Branching strategy for a demo

In this post we will talk about source control merging when a demo needs to be prepared.

I expect that all of us knows what a branch is. To be sure that we are talking about the same thing, let's see the definition from Wikipedia:
Branching, in revision control and software configuration management, is the duplication of an object under revision control (such as a source code file or a directory tree) so that modifications can happen in parallel along both branches.
I don't want to enter in the different strategies of branching topic. There are multiple ways to do it in different phases of a project.
Usually, during the development of a project we will have multiple branches in parallel or in different moment in time. For example:
  • Main
  • Development
  • Testing
  • Integration
  • Production
, on top of this if we have multiple versions of a product supported in parallel that we will have for each version another group of branches. And this is not all, based on the team needs or what kind of feature they are developing, they may require and need custom branches where they can implement and play with the code or freeze the code at a specific version.

Now, to simplify the problem, let's assume that we have only one branch - main. At the end of the sprint, the client requires a demo. After the demo you need to be able to provide that specific version to the client and even make small fixes of that code if any issues are requires. This could be required if the client wants to go with the demo to senior executive for example.
In parallel with this, the team will continue to develop new features and go further with the next sprint.
In this moment there are two different options on the table:
  • Create a branch for the demo
Or
  • Create a branch for the next sprint (features that will be develop by the team) and use the main as branch demo.

(yes, the main branch is not the best name, it should be called Development, but for this example we went with main)

To be able to decide what is the best solution we need to take into account what branch needs to exists long after the demo is done. If we are creating a branch for the next sprint, then the development team may be blocked on the secondary branch until the demo is done and client say that he doesn't needs that demo anymore. This can be a week, a month or even more.
On the other hand, we can see the demo as a small release, that should be managed separately, with his own versioning and life. Fixes in the demo branch will need to be merged in the man branch because we don't want to lose them.

I imagine another branching solution for this problem:
  • Main
  • DevSprintX
  • DemoSprintX
At the end of each sprint the DevSprintX is merged in the main if the sprint success. The DemoSprintX is created at the end of each sprint and is kept until the client confirms that he doesn't need anymore the demo.

Of course, we don't discuss what is happening after release. This is another story. Or if we have a testing team.

We can have different branching strategies, based on our needs and setup. As a rule, don't complicate your life if you don't need it.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

Azure AD and AWS Cognito side-by-side

In the last few weeks, I was involved in multiple opportunities on Microsoft Azure and Amazon, where we had to analyse AWS Cognito, Azure AD and other solutions that are available on the market. I decided to consolidate in one post all features and differences that I identified for both of them that we should need to take into account. Take into account that Azure AD is an identity and access management services well integrated with Microsoft stack. In comparison, AWS Cognito is just a user sign-up, sign-in and access control and nothing more. The focus is not on the main features, is more on small things that can make a difference when you want to decide where we want to store and manage our users.  This information might be useful in the future when we need to decide where we want to keep and manage our users.  Feature Azure AD (B2C, B2C) AWS Cognito Access token lifetime Default 1h – the value is configurable 1h – cannot be modified

What to do when you hit the throughput limits of Azure Storage (Blobs)

In this post we will talk about how we can detect when we hit a throughput limit of Azure Storage and what we can do in that moment. Context If we take a look on Scalability Targets of Azure Storage ( https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/storage-scalability-targets/ ) we will observe that the limits are prety high. But, based on our business logic we can end up at this limits. If you create a system that is hitted by a high number of device, you can hit easily the total number of requests rate that can be done on a Storage Account. This limits on Azure is 20.000 IOPS (entities or messages per second) where (and this is very important) the size of the request is 1KB. Normally, if you make a load tests where 20.000 clients will hit different blobs storages from the same Azure Storage Account, this limits can be reached. How we can detect this problem? From client, we can detect that this limits was reached based on the HTTP error code that is returned by HTTP