> VSTS logs the PR number and the relevant work-items in the message so for any given commit it's easy to get back to the PR where you can see the detailed disc

> VSTS logs the PR number and the relevant work-items in the message so for any given commit it's easy to get back to the PR where you can see the detailed discussion of the change, requirements, etc. I've worked on a couple project that took the approach of documenting the details of what was done in the bug tracker (or PR/MR), etc, and then just putting the bug# and a one-line description in the commit history. In every one of these projects, we ended up later moving to a different bug tracking system. In some cases the bugs were transferred, but the numbers were not, in others nothing was transferred. Suddenly all those bug numbers in the commit history were completely meaningless and useless. I'm now a strong advocate that the detailed documentation should be in the commits messages themselves. One of my biggest complaints with gitlab is that you spend all this time writing a good MR description, and then it has no mechanism for including that description in the actual merge commit.