While I understand the benefits of trunk-based development, I'm still waiting for someone to explain how it's supposed to work in larger organizations. And how code review should look like.
Also, regarding the argument about continuous integration - you are supposed to rebase main branch often, so you are actually continuously integrating changes into a feature branch. And as such, it can be considered as short-living.
Trunk based development works in large organizations by splitting teams code bases by the services they manage and allowing teams to manage their own code review. There isn't a huge difference between a tiny organization and a single team within a a well structured large organisation.
I wouldn't recommend rebasing as it modifies history to be inaccurate, merging is generally a better approach. If you are continuously integrating enough that is always consistent then there is no point having separate branches.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
While I understand the benefits of trunk-based development, I'm still waiting for someone to explain how it's supposed to work in larger organizations. And how code review should look like.
Also, regarding the argument about continuous integration - you are supposed to rebase main branch often, so you are actually continuously integrating changes into a feature branch. And as such, it can be considered as short-living.
Trunk based development works in large organizations by splitting teams code bases by the services they manage and allowing teams to manage their own code review. There isn't a huge difference between a tiny organization and a single team within a a well structured large organisation.
I wouldn't recommend rebasing as it modifies history to be inaccurate, merging is generally a better approach. If you are continuously integrating enough that is always consistent then there is no point having separate branches.