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)