Preference for branches

[Luke Hankey]

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone had an ideal way for using branches based on a hierarchy. We currently have 2 options (but more are welcomed) to go through and we would like to know if there is some sort of standard or preferred way of doing so.

Scenario 1:

Under each Epic, we have stories and for each story, we create a new branch. Within each story, we can use sub-tasks as the main tasks where all tasks will also have their own feature branch and PR. All task branches are merged into the story branch to keep track of file changes, conflicts and a final review of the story.

Scenario 2:

Again, under each Epic we have stories. Tasks are also created (not sub-tasks this time) which are linked to the story (since Epic > Story > Sub-task instead of Epic > Story > Task > Sub-task). The story branch is just 1 PR where each commit will have an issue key to link to the tasks.

[carlos_marin - ENTELGY -]

Hi,

With this model "Epic > Story > Task > Sub-task" you are not following the Jira issue hierarchy and you are adding the complexity to link the tasks to the stories.

I will follow the standard jira hierarchy "Epic > Story  or Task > Sub-task" and create more stories.

Best regards,

[Luke Hankey]

Thanks for your answer. I do understand the JIRA issue hierarchy but I've seen it noted on issue requests and other areas where "Epic > Story > Task > Sub-task" seems to be more logical which is why I used it in my scenario above.

The second scenario uses both stories and tasks where tasks are linked to the stories so that we can use the "Epic > Story > Task > Sub-task" hierarchy. However, it's not very fun to do since linking tasks with stories needs to be done manually whereas in scenario one, we use sub-tasks on stories which are automatically linked.