Using Gitflow and Semantic Versioning: How to avoid version number conflicts when merging?

Question

I want to use gitflow in combination with semantic versioning. In gitflow, you bump version numbers on every release or hotfix branch. This inevitably leads to version conflicts if a new development cycle (with a new version number) is started while the current release process is still ongoing.

Let's say, 1.0.0 is on master, and on develop I start the new 2.0.0 release. Now, a hotfix from master occurs (1.0.1). When merging the hotfix onto the develop branch, a conflict will happen.

There is a somewhat similar question here on SE@Stackexchange, with a major difference: Because my gradle and maven build tools heavily rely on version numbers, I have to store them in my code and can't just generate them when building a release. And I have to raise the version number on develop for a new release cycle, otherwise artifacts will get overridden.

So how can I manage my branches and version numbers so that no merge conflicts can occur?

Answer 1

You cannot reasonably avoid this merge conflict. But it is a very minor conflict and easy to resolve during the merge – but make sure that the version number is only written in one source file.

Hotfixes are probably rare enough that a manual resolution is sufficient. However, it might be sensible to add a kind of test that the correct version number was maintained, e.g. a script to check that the version number in a commit is monotonically increasing from all parent commits. Merging versions 1.0.1 and 2.0.0 would be allowed to result in >= 2.0.0.

Note that the Git-Flow is not always an applicable branching model. It is oriented towards scenarios that have clear, somewhat infrequent releases, where you might need to support old releases. This can be a good fit for off-the-shelf applications or libraries.

Git-Flow is not a good fit when you can update all deployments/users to the newest release, e.g. for in-house software, SaaS, or web/mobile apps. Then, a different branching model without release branches might be more appropriate. This implies that your development branch is always in a releasable state, which in turn means that all features that were merged are ready for release OR are protected by a feature toggle. A hotfix is then an ordinary feature for the next release, and no backporting/merging of the hotfix is necessary.