Adam Ruka writes on Git workflows, infrastructure as code, Java patterns, and a tutorial series on building interpreters with Graal Truffle.
HN commenters point to "GitFlow considered harmful" and the simpler OneFlow alternative, and recommend his Truffle interpreter series.
See for example: http://endoflineblog.com/gitflow-considered-harmful
"I remember reading the original GitFlow article back when it first came out. I was deeply unimpressed - I thought it was a weird, over-engineered solution to a non-existent problem. I couldn't see a single benefit of using such a heavy approach. I quickly dismissed the article and continued to use Git the way I always did (I'll describe that way later in the article). Now, after having some hands-on experience with GitFlow, and based on my observations of others using (or, should I say more precisely, trying to use) it, that initial, intuitive dislike has grown into a well-founded, experienced distaste. In this article I want to explain precisely the reasons for that distaste, and present an alternative way of branching which is superior, at least in my opinion, to GitFlow in every way."
And a summary of an alternative proposed there: http://endoflineblog.com/oneflow-a-git-branching-model-and-workflow
"As the name suggests, OneFlow's basic premise is to have one eternal branch in your repository. This brings a number of advantages (see below) without losing any expressivity of the branching model - the more advanced use cases are made possible through the usage of Git tags. While the workflow advocates having one long-lived branch, that doesn't mean there aren't other branches involved when using it. On the contrary, the branching model encourages using a variety of support branches (see below for the…
Relevant article: http://endoflineblog.com/gitflow-considered-harmful
In particular, this rings true to every complex source control process I've used that isn't actually enforced with software:
You could of course say that all of these mistakes are the result of human error, and if the same people just read the documentation and learned from their experiences, everything would be fine. But I have seen these mistakes being made so many times, by otherwise competent developers, that I don't buy this argument. There's a saying I love: "If one person tells you you have a tail, ignore them; if a hundred people tell you that, look behind you". If these mistakes happen over and over again (and I can confirm based on my experience that they do), made by different people in different circumstances, then there's no rational alternative to admitting there has to be something fundamentally flawed about the method being used.
The author of "GitFlow Considered Harmful" put out a simpler workflow that achieves all the upsides of GitFlow with none of the downsides:
https://www.endoflineblog.com/oneflow-a-git-branching-model-and-workflow
If you can tell me something GitFlow buys you which OneFlow doesn't, I'd be very intrigued.
Wasn't it so that as Graal jitter is written in Java, Truffle can easily call it by using ordinary Java api?
By the way there's an excellent series of articles about implementing an interpreter with Truffle by Adam Ruka: https://www.endoflineblog.com/graal-truffle-tutorial-part-12-classes-1-methods-new