2 ms·
>The codebase I'm currently working on has recent commits with description "review", "add addressDto" and "post rebase fix". I guess what I don't get, is that
by justinlaster 10y ago
>The codebase I'm currently working on has recent commits with description "review", "add addressDto" and "post rebase fix".
I guess what I don't get, is that if you have people doing commit messages like that, how can you possibly expect them to appropriately name a branch which most likely stores far less characters.
- zck 10y agoBecause you're less in the nitty-gritty when naming a branch, so you're more likely to name it with something referencing the large feature you're working on.
- aidenn0 10y agoFar too often the commit message says "what" while the branch name says "why." Just recently I had to triage a recently discovered bug whose symptoms disappeared about 4 years ago to determine if the bug was fixed or just masked. This was code that I was completely unfamiliar with because the other engineers that might have looked at it were otherwise indisposed working on things that were known for sure to be issues. The "what" told me the specific change that masked the bug and the "why" informed me of the feature that this supported. That allowed me to generate a new test-case that showed up in the current version. Without both pieces of information I would likely have had to spend a couple of hours inspecting code changes to do the same.
- justinlaster 10y agoIf you can't trust your developers to write acceptable commit messages, why are you trusting them to write code?