> hence, stuff like this "Some teams go even further and require that the issue number is tracked in every commit." well, I was on a team that did this and a lo

> hence, stuff like this "Some teams go even further and require that the issue number is tracked in every commit." well, I was on a team that did this and a lot of other stuff listed here but as it happens it wasn't one of the most productive teams I've ever been on. This shouldn't be interpreted so narrowly. In situations where you are adding small features for fixing bugs to an existing system, having a separate issue per commit really helps communicate the background and intent behind the commit, because a lot of problem solving takes place before any code is changed, and can be very helpful for people who have to change the code later on, or reviewers of the code just prior to commit. If however you are working on a new concept by rapid prototyping, or working on a single large feature comprised of multiple commits, it makes more sense to have a single issue that represents that effort, and all commits related to it point to the same issue. This minimizes issue management overhead while still maintaining the link between the commits and their motivating rationale. Either way, a link to the human conversation that gave rise to a commit or series of commits is very important for understanding the intent behind the code change.