version-control

Enforce safe Git workflows with feature branching, conventional commits, and review gates.

11|2|Updated Apr 7, 2022

Search Tags:#git #branching #code-review #conventional-commits #merge-strategy #main-protection

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/nullhack/temple8 --skill version-control-nullhack

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: version-control
Source: https://github.com/nullhack/temple8/tree/main/.opencode/skills/version-control
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/nullhack/temple8 --skill version-control-nullhack

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Git workflows often lead to unsafe history, risky merges, and unclear accountability. This skill codifies a safe branching model, prohibits dangerous operations on main branches, and enforces conventional commits and adversarial reviews to keep history auditable.

Core Features & Use Cases

Branch lifecycle governance: create feature branches from main, develop on the branch, and merge back with --no-ff after acceptance.
Commit hygiene: enforce conventional commit messages and clear descriptions, with traceability to features.
Release discipline: prevent commits directly to main; require pull requests and post-mortem records.

Quick Start

Initialize a feature branch from main, commit changes with conventional messages, and merge to main with a no-ff strategy after final approval.

Frequently Asked Questions about version-control

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I prevent force pushes and direct commits to the main branch in Git?▼

Mainline protection in Git forbids force pushes and direct commits to main, requiring pull requests and code reviews before any changes merge. This enforces a safe branching model that keeps history auditable and prevents risky operations.

What is the best way to enforce conventional commits during feature branch development?▼

Enforcing conventional commits during feature branch development requires codifying commit hygiene rules that mandate clear descriptions and traceability to features. This prevents unclear accountability and ensures the Git history remains auditable across the team.

Does a safe Git workflow require adversarial code reviews before merging?▼

Yes, adversarial review gates are required before acceptance to ensure release readiness. This step prevents risky merges by mandating rigorous code review as part of the feature-branch lifecycle before any changes integrate into the mainline.

How do I manage the feature branch lifecycle from creation to release?▼

Managing a feature branch lifecycle involves creating the branch from main, developing with conventional commit messages, and merging back with a no-ff strategy after final approval. This governance ensures release discipline and clear traceability.