Choosing the Right Git Workflow: A Comparative Analysis of Trunk-based vs. Branch-based Approaches

Git has become one of the most widely used version control systems today. Among its distinguishing features, its ability to easily and quickly create branches stands out, allowing teams to customize their workflows. In this context, various formats of collaborative development workflows using Git have emerged and gained popularity among software engineers. We can categorize such workflows into two main types: branch-based workflows and trunk-based workflows. Branch-based workflows typically define a set of remote branches with well-defined objectives, such as feature branches, a branch for feature integration, and a main branch. The goal is to migrate changes from the most isolated branch to the main one shared by all as the code matures. In this category, GitFlow stands out as the most popular example. In contrast, trunk-based workflows have a single remote branch where developers integrate their changes directly. In this range of options, choosing a workflow that maximizes team productivity while promoting software quality becomes a non-trivial task. Despite discussions on forums, social networks, and blogs, few scientific articles have explored this topic. In this work, we provide evidence on how Brazilian developers work with Git workflows and what factors favor or hinder the use of each model. To this end, we conducted semi-structured interviews and a survey with software developers. Our results indicate that trunk-based development favors fast-paced projects with experienced and smaller teams, while branch-based development suits less experienced and larger teams better, despite posing management challenges.