With regular git and github I can do a code review by simply creating a pull request of the feature branch I'm working on to the master branch. How would I do code reviews with git-flow? With workflow like "git flow feature finish` I'm confused as to where the code review actually happens and how git-flow or git can facilitate that review.
If you're doing code reviews, then I will assume that you have a central repository that contains the "official" code. Developers pull from and push to this central repository.
When you use Gerrit, Gerrit itself becomes the central repository (it has built-in SSH and HTTP servers that let users interact with it in basically the same way they already are). When using Gerrit, the workflow becomes:
When using a central repository, other developers can see the submitted changes after step 2. Gerrit introduces the code review workflow, and so other developers only see the submitted changes after step 5.
This works well with git-flow (or any other branching scheme) because Gerrit supports reviewing changes made on any branch.
We stumbled on this exact problem recently. We really like git flow, has it use a good level of semantic (using the same level that you use in team discussion : "I'll start feature A" more than "I'll create a branch, checkout it"), while git is very "implementation" level (which is good and useful also, but different).
The problem we have is with git feature finish, as it merge the branch into the develop, while we want a pull request to be sent and (this is important) merged by the reviewer, not the committer, to emphasize team ownership.
Our current solution :
This is consistent with our practice, with the downside of requiring to delete the branch ourselves (as we do not git flow finish). Our next step will probably be to reimplement some parts of git flow (as it is mainly about chaining git commands) to take this into account (having the "cleaning" part of the finish, without the merge).