If it's identical to #297, can't you just merge the main branch into develop?

usually I tend to merge main into develop right before a PR (from develop to main) - does it make more sense to do hot fixes merging one then the other, or does it not matter?

If it's identical to #297, can't you just merge the main branch into develop?

usually I tend to merge main into develop right before a PR (from develop to main) - does it make more sense to do hot fixes merging one then the other, or does it not matter?

In terms of the end result, it doesn’t matter. The order only matters for the git history (mainly the merge commit). Ideally, the hot fix should’ve been merged into dev first, then merge dev into main. But, this is workflow stuff so it makes sense to merge it directly into main.

This is really a style/preference sort of thing. By merging main into dev, you have one less PR and a cleaner git history as the same commits aren’t merged twice.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.55172% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.70%. Comparing base (ddff06b) to head (923bbc6).
Report is 84 commits behind head on develop.

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #298   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    67.70%   67.70%           
========================================
  Files          166      166           
  Lines        26710    26734   +24     
========================================
+ Hits         18083    18100   +17     
- Misses        8627     8634    +7     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Thanks both for the suggestions and reviews, @ben-l-p & @wong-hl!!