Git Workflows: Branching, Morks, and Merges

Git workflows guide how a team creates branches, tests ideas, and integrates changes. A clear workflow reduces conflicts and makes releases predictable. In this post we explore three parts: branching, a lightweight practice we call Morks, and merges. The goal is a simple approach that fits many teams, from solo developers to larger squads. You will find practical tips, quick commands, and naming ideas you can use today.

Branching gives teams a way to isolate work. The typical setup uses a stable main branch and feature branches for new work. Common patterns include feature/…, bugfix/…, and release/…. Keep branches small and focused. Start from main, commit often, and push early. To stay current, regularly merge or rebase with the latest main before opening a pull request.

Morks are tiny, low-risk experiments that live on their own branches. For example, mork/tooltip-light or mork/new-button-idea. A Mork can be merged into a feature branch when it passes a quick check, or dropped if it does not help. This keeps main clean while you learn faster.

Merges and history shape how teams read the project story. Merge commits clearly show when branches join; squash merges compress work into a single commit; rebase rewrites history on top of another branch. For public branches, prefer merge commits or rebase only with care. Use pull requests, automated tests, and careful conflict resolution to stay safe.

Practical flow: work starts on main, then a feature branch grows alongside a Mork. Validate the idea, merge the Mork into the feature, refine, and finally open a PR to merge the feature into main. Keep changes small, review will help, and CI checks often catch issues early.

Key Takeaways

• Clear branching reduces risk and clarifies history
• Morks enable fast, safe experiments without disturbing main work
• Choose a merge strategy that fits team needs and the project