Why Trunk-Based Development Is Critical for DevOps Maturity and Faster Releases

TL;DR

• Trunk-Based Development is a key DevOps maturity move because it makes integration continuous, not a last-minute merge event.
• Small, frequent merges keep the main branch deployable, which directly enables faster and safer releases.
• Short-lived branches plus fast reviews cut merge conflicts, reduce code drift, and shrink release risk.
• Feature flags let teams ship in small increments while controlling when users actually see changes.
• The result is better delivery performance: shorter lead time, higher deployment frequency, and faster recovery when issues happen.

---

What Trunk-based Development is

Trunk-based development means your team keeps one main copy of the code (called main or trunk) and everyone adds their changes to it frequently.

Instead of working for weeks in separate branches and merging at the end, developers:

• make small changes
• merge them into the main branch many times a day or at least daily
• keep the main branch always working and ready to release

Here are the simple rules:

• One main branch is the real codebase: trunk is the latest and most up-to-date version.
• Branches are short: if you create a branch, it lasts hours or a day, not weeks.
• Changes are small and frequent: small updates are easier to merge and review.
• Main stays healthy: every change should keep the build and tests passing.

Small teams may push changes straight to main. Bigger teams usually create a short branch, open a quick pull request for review, then merge back the same day.

Sometimes teams create a release branch to ship a specific version, but that branch is only for releasing. Developers should not do regular work there. Bug fixes should be done in main first, then copied into the release branch if needed.

---

Why Branching Strategy decides DevOps Maturity 

DevOps maturity means you can ship changes fast, safely, and again and again without drama. This builds directly on the fundamentals explained in What is DevOps in Software Development.  Most teams do not get stuck because they lack CI/CD tools. They get stuck because their day-to-day workflow delays merging work together and delays feedback on whether it actually works.

When teams use long-lived branches, the same problems show up repeatedly:

• Hidden merge pain builds up: the longer code changes sit outside the main branch, the more the main codebase changes. By the time you merge, things no longer match and conflicts grow.
• Feedback comes too late: tests, code reviews, and real-world checks happen at the end, when fixing issues takes more time and effort.
• Releases turn into big events: teams need code freezes, extra testing windows, and lots of coordination just to ship safely.
• Work becomes invisible: progress is harder to track, and the final merge becomes a high-risk moment.

Trunk-Based Development removes that hiding place. It forces teams to merge small changes daily and verify quality continuously, so integration and testing become normal daily work, not a stressful end-of-sprint activity.

This also matches Lean thinking. When you keep work small and avoid piling up unfinished changes, you reduce waste and lower the chance of defects reaching production. In software terms, it means integrating tiny changes continuously instead of stacking big changes that are painful to combine later.

---

The guardrails that make TBD safe at speed

Small batches

Small batches are the base rule. If you want to merge into the main branch daily, you cannot work in huge chunks. You need to keep changes small enough that they can be added safely without breaking other work.

That usually means:

• keep pull requests small
• break big features into smaller steps
• merge unfinished work behind feature flags instead of waiting until everything is complete

When changes are small, reviewers can understand them quickly, merge conflicts stay minor, and if something goes wrong, the impact is limited.

Automated testing

With TBD, everyone is merging into the same main branch, so testing becomes your safety net. If tests are slow or unreliable, people lose confidence and start avoiding frequent merges, which pushes the team back into big risky changes.

A practical testing setup looks like this, which aligns closely with the workflow described in Accelerate Time-to-Market with DevOps CI/CD:

• run fast tests first, like unit tests and small integration tests, on every pull request and merge
• run deeper tests later in the pipeline, like end-to-end tests, security checks, and performance tests
• encourage developers to run key tests before pushing changes

The aim is not to create the maximum number of tests. The aim is quick, trustworthy feedback so the team can merge often without fear.

Fast code review

TBD still needs code review. The difference is that review has to keep pace with frequent merging.

To make that work:

• reviews need to happen quickly because old pull requests become harder to merge and more risky
• small changes are easier to review properly
• automation should handle routine checks like formatting, linting, security scanning, and coverage trends so humans focus on logic and design

Teams that truly operate CI/CD usually set a strong expectation for same-day review and same-day merge whenever possible.

Feature flags and branch by abstraction

Feature flags are what make multi-day features possible in TBD without creating long-lived branches. Instead of keeping work hidden in a branch, you merge it into main but keep it turned off with a feature flag.

This approach lets you:

• deploy code without showing it to users
• test gradually in production-like environments
• roll out slowly with canary releases or internal-only access first
• switch the feature off quickly if something behaves badly, without a painful rollback

To avoid feature flags becoming messy, teams need clear rules:

• clear ownership
• naming conventions
• expiry and cleanup rules
• a process to remove flags once features are fully released

Fast builds and pipeline throughput

TBD increases how often you merge. That automatically increases how often you build and test, which makes consistency through Infrastructure as Code (IaC) as Business Insurance increasingly important. If your pipeline cannot keep up, work starts piling up, and you recreate the same risks TBD was meant to remove.

To keep flow fast, teams focus on:

• caching where it helps
• running tests in parallel
• running critical tests first
• reducing flaky tests
• avoiding long queues of pending pull requests

When builds and tests stay fast, the team can keep merging small changes confidently, and releases stay smooth.

---

TBD maturity model for DevOps teams

Most teams should not try to switch to trunk-based development overnight, as it typically follows the progression outlined in DevOps Maturity Model: Stages, Indicators, and What to Fix at Each Stage. It works best when you grow into it step by step, building the habits and safety systems that support faster releases.

Ad-hoc maturity

At this stage, the main goal is to change daily habits and reduce the size of work being merged.

What it looks like:

• everyone treats trunk as the real source of truth
• developers learn to break work into smaller changes
• code reviews follow a consistent minimum standard
• the team starts tracking simple signals like merge frequency and pull request size

Repeatable maturity

Now the focus shifts to adding automation and release safety so frequent merging becomes reliable.

What it looks like:

• CI runs automatically on every pull request and merge
• there is a staging environment for validation before production
• automated tests are fast and reliable enough to support daily merges
• feature flags become normal for anything that cannot be finished in a day

Managed maturity

At this stage, teams want releases to be predictable and resilient, not just fast.

What it looks like:

• a clear release process exists, such as a release train
• rollback and incident response are documented and practiced
• teams monitor build time, deploy time, and quality indicators
• approval steps are streamlined so they do not force large batches

Scalable maturity

Here, the challenge is keeping speed while the team and codebase get bigger.

What it looks like:

• platform engineering treats CI/CD like a product and keeps it running smoothly
• testing and monitoring become more advanced and proactive
• the team continuously removes bottlenecks like long test runs and PR backlogs
• clear ownership boundaries prevent multiple teams from constantly colliding in the same parts of the codebase

This is why TBD is tied to DevOps maturity. To do it well, teams must invest in the pipeline, testing, and working style that make fast delivery safe and repeatable.

---

How to measure TBD adoption

To ensure this is operational and not aspirational, track the workflow signals below. These are simple but powerful.

Measurement area	What to track	Target for high-performing teams	Why it matters
Branch sprawl	Active branches per repo	3 or fewer	Too many branches usually means hidden work and delayed integration
Freeze dependence	Code freeze periods	None or very rare	Freezes indicate integration is not routine
Integration cadence	Merge frequency to trunk	At least daily	Daily merges keep conflicts small and feedback fast
Review throughput	Time to approve changes	Same day when possible	Slow approvals force large batches and increase risk

Once these are moving in the right direction, connect them to outcomes such as lead time, deployment frequency, change failure rate, and recovery time. TBD itself is not the goal. The goal is predictable delivery with lower risk.

---

Common pitfalls and how to fix them

Heavy approvals slow the flow

When approvals require too many steps, developers start merging less often to avoid delays. This leads to larger, riskier changes.

Fix: Automate routine checks (like linting or security scans) and set clear guidelines for when deeper review is necessary. This way, the approval process stays fast without sacrificing quality.

Slow reviews create stale pull requests

Pull requests that sit too long without review drift away from the trunk, making it harder to merge and increasing the risk of errors.

Fix: Set review service level agreements (SLAs), rotate reviewers to keep feedback fresh, and keep pull requests small. This ensures quicker and more manageable reviews.

Lack of automated tests makes trunk fragile

If tests are unreliable or slow, developers lose confidence, and the main branch becomes unstable.

Fix: Focus on improving the reliability and speed of tests rather than just adding more tests. Fast, reliable tests catch issues early and keep the trunk stable.

Code churn and confusion

Frequent commits can get messy if there’s a lack of communication or unclear ownership, making it hard to understand what’s happening.

Fix: Clearly define ownership, follow consistent commit and pull request conventions, and keep work well-scoped. This ensures everyone knows what’s being worked on and reduces confusion.

Scaling challenges

As teams grow, more commits lead to increased load on CI systems, which can slow things down and make it easier to break the build.

Fix: Invest in improving pipeline speed (e.g., parallel testing or better caching), consider having a platform team to maintain the CI/CD pipeline, and minimize code collisions by setting clear ownership areas in the codebase.

---

When TBD is the right choice

TBD works best when:

• You’re developing an MVP and need to iterate quickly.
  
• You release updates frequently and want to minimize delays.
  
• Your team has a high-trust culture where everyone shares responsibility for the code.
  
• You’re ready to invest in testing, speeding up CI, and improving the developer experience.

For startups and small businesses, TBD is often a game-changer because it enables faster learning and delivery, without the cumbersome release processes.

---

When TBD is not the right choice yet

TBD adoption will be harder when:

• Teams are fragmented with weak communication.
• The team is junior-heavy and lacks strong guardrails.
• You require strict bundling of features but do not have mature feature flag practices.
• The trust model requires fault-tolerant gating, such as open contribution workflows.

In these cases, you can still adopt partial principles: shorten branch lifetimes, reduce pull request size, increase merge frequency, and strengthen CI, then transition toward full TBD when guardrails are ready.

---

30-day adoption plan

Here is a practical approach to move toward TBD without breaking delivery.

Week 1: Reduce batch size

• Enforce smaller pull requests.
• Set a daily merge expectation.
• Delete branches after merge.

Week 2: Stabilize CI and tests

• Ensure CI runs on every pull request and merge.
• Fix flaky tests.
• Reduce build times where possible.

Week 3: Introduce feature flags

• Use feature flags for any work that cannot be completed within a day.
• Create flag ownership and cleanup rules.
• Start using gradual rollouts for riskier changes.

Week 4: Operationalize

• Track branch count, merge frequency, and approval time.
• Reduce or eliminate code freezes.
• Practice rollback and incident workflows so confidence increases.

---

Read More: From Chaos to Automation: Your 30-Day DevOps Roadmap.

---

Conclusion

Trunk-Based Development is not just a branching style. It is a practical signal of DevOps maturity because it pushes teams toward the habits that make fast releases safe: small daily merges, quick feedback, strong automated testing, and feature flags that separate deployment from release. When teams stop relying on long-lived branches and code freezes, delivery becomes predictable, merge risk drops, and shipping becomes a routine workflow instead of a high-stress event.

If you want to adopt TBD without breaking quality, the real work is building the right guardrails and operating rhythm around CI/CD, reviews, testing, and release controls. If you want help assessing where you are today and what to change first, explore our DevOps consulting services for a practical roadmap to faster, safer releases.

---

FAQs:

1. What are the benefits of trunk-based development?

• Faster feedback: Small, frequent changes allow quick fixes.
  
• Reduced merge conflicts: Daily merges keep changes small and manageable.
  
• Continuous quality: The main branch stays deployable and production-ready.
  
• Simplified workflows: Fewer long-lived branches reduce complexity.
  
• Faster delivery: Continuous integration speeds up product releases.

2. How does DevOps enable faster development of new products and easier maintenance of existing deployments?

DevOps speeds up development through continuous integration (CI) and delivery (CD). It automates testing, integration, and deployment, leading to:

• Quick development cycles
  
• Easier maintenance
  
• Reliable releases

3. Is trunk-based development better than Gitflow?

Trunk-based development is better for fast releases and continuous integration. It reduces complexity by keeping merges small and frequent, while Gitflow works better for long-term feature isolation and version management.

4. Does trunk-based development have release branches?

Trunk-based development typically avoids release branches. The main branch stays production-ready, and feature flags allow unfinished features to be merged safely. Release branches are rare and used only for final stabilization.

---