I have never thought about it and I can't say it would be as useful to me. I project-hop all the time and try to get a few things done on a few projects.
My release cycles are automated so my time-to-release is ~2 to 5 minutes from when I git push to any of my projects to when tests run and then code is deployed (I prefer containers for the ease of promoting/demoting images in production.) This feels healthy/good enough.
My time-to-fix is tied to how quickly I notice an issue or someone reports it to me.
I PR bigger features, but I don't fear developing on main for my solo projects because I have tests running before code is deployed. This saves me time and frustration.
For clients and bigger teams, I PR every time and have different considerations, but it's not the end of the world if I need to fall back on a previous version for a bit while I fix something. 90% of the time, my changes are small and iterative enough that there's not much to have to worry about breaking.
Good insights - thanks! I agree if you have a solid test suite you don't really need to worry about working directly on main. I think I'm probably in a similar boat to you - PR bigger features, and do small updates directly on main.
Would you care at all how your progress compares to other projects, in terms of time-to-release / failure rates etc, if that info were available?
I have never thought about it and I can't say it would be as useful to me. I project-hop all the time and try to get a few things done on a few projects.
My release cycles are automated so my time-to-release is ~2 to 5 minutes from when I git push to any of my projects to when tests run and then code is deployed (I prefer containers for the ease of promoting/demoting images in production.) This feels healthy/good enough.
My time-to-fix is tied to how quickly I notice an issue or someone reports it to me.
I PR bigger features, but I don't fear developing on main for my solo projects because I have tests running before code is deployed. This saves me time and frustration.
For clients and bigger teams, I PR every time and have different considerations, but it's not the end of the world if I need to fall back on a previous version for a bit while I fix something. 90% of the time, my changes are small and iterative enough that there's not much to have to worry about breaking.
Good insights - thanks! I agree if you have a solid test suite you don't really need to worry about working directly on main. I think I'm probably in a similar boat to you - PR bigger features, and do small updates directly on main.
Would you care at all how your progress compares to other projects, in terms of time-to-release / failure rates etc, if that info were available?