git-workflow

Pull request templates enforce consistent information collection by pre-populating PR descriptions with checklists and required sections. Define a template file in your repository to ensure every contributor includes testing notes, change descriptions, and review requirements before merging.

Branch naming conventions organize work by type—feature, bugfix, refactor, docs, test, chore—making branch purpose instantly visible. Consistent naming reduces confusion during code reviews and simplifies automation around branch lifecycle and merge strategies.

Merge strategies—Squash, Merge, and Rebase—each handle conflicts differently. Squash combines commits before merging, Merge preserves history with a merge commit, and Rebase replays commits linearly. Choosing one strategy team-wide prevents inconsistent conflict resolution and maintains readable history.

Yes. PR templates trigger required checklists and testing workflows, while branch naming conventions enable automated routing to reviewers. Combined, they reduce manual coordination and enforce review standards before code reaches production branches.

Squash merge simplifies history for short-lived feature branches by combining all commits into one; Rebase preserves individual commit history for long-running work. Choose Squash for cleaner main-branch history, Rebase when commit-level traceability matters for debugging.