The process of git release version is to create a develop branch from the local PD_BUG001 branch, the repair is completed, push is sent to the remote, and a pull request is created on the remote web page to merge the request to develop. The administrator agrees to the merge request. At this time, which version of the branch is released to the code on the remote server?
According to my personal opinion, I should release the master branch. If so, do I have to merge the develop branch into the master branch?
Go to that server and git pull to pull the master branch. Is this the case?
![[Web front-end] Node.js quick start](https://img.php.cn/upload/course/000/000/067/662b5d34ba7c0227.png)
Normally there is a Server branch dedicated to the server.
Simply put it is this.
Your Fork project
You complete the function in the local branch (may require multiple commits)
Pull original project, and merge
Push to your fork project
Pull Request to a branch of the original project
2A. Determine a commit as the code that will be officially put online, and tag it.
2B. Test the code in the test environment
2C. Push the commit to the Server branch.
2D.git pull
GIT is distributed, there is no strong inheritance relationship, and there is no strong connection between local branches and remote branches.
Your code request is merged into the remote develop branch. After the administrator agrees, the code will of course be on the remote develop branch.
In addition, there is a big problem with your process. The branch to fix the bug should be created from the master branch, and then synchronized to the master and develop branches at the same time, instead of branching off develop and then to the master branch. If you do this in the middle of develop and the bug is urgent, should you abandon the developed code or wait until develop is fully developed before fixing the bug?