4 ms·
>Letting devs continuously push their shitty commits Do you mind explaining/disclosing your position to dev teams? I hope this is not your point of view of a
by xlayn 11y ago
>Letting devs continuously push their shitty commits
Do you mind explaining/disclosing your position to dev teams?
I hope this is not your point of view of a dev in general.
Last please keep it constructive, this doesn't address the source of the problem how did you solve it/what you have tried but just rant about your perception (given no reason is provided).
- stevebmark 11y agoI am the dev making shitty commits. I've also worked with devs much smarter than me, and they also make some shitty commits. I have no problem explaining this reasoning to them. I wouldn't use the same language I use as an anonymous internet poster. But everyone makes mistakes. Even the best of the star players break the build every now and then. Even the CTO sometimes takes down the whole system by accident. (Always using) feature branches and auto-deploying master are a solution I like. This also allows for easy code reviews. It also encourages a culture of things like good, detailed commit messages (it's easy to push an un-reviewed commit of "fixes" to master). It's also easy to run auto CI tests on these branches. It also allows for gatekeeping if you have a contractor or someone on your team who shouldn't have full commit access.