> The general sentiment of this article is in things like: > > A commit message is already too annoying for many users! You have misrepresented the article. I

> The general sentiment of this article is in things like: > > A commit message is already too annoying for many users! You have misrepresented the article. It actually says: > [Commit messages] can be annoying. But we generally accept that as the price you pay for version control: that commit message has value to others (or even your future self). Maybe you misunderstood "generally accept"; it could be taken to mean "this is what people normally think (but actually they're wrong)". But it's clear from the context he doesn't mean that: it's saying that commit messages really are worth the effort (but it's OK to admit that they do take some effort). It's just context for contrast against saying that a separate staging step is not (always/by default) worth the effort.