3 ms·
I like it, but I feel like it is closer to a merge request message / merge / rebase commit message. Generally I think it is good form to break down your storie
by wodenokoto 5y ago
I like it, but I feel like it is closer to a merge request message / merge / rebase commit message.
Generally I think it is good form to break down your stories so they match the scope of a reasonable merge request and name the branch [issue-id]-human_readable_text
- jakeinspace 5y agoAgreed. I can't imagine working on a feature branch and writing 50 of these for a moderately large change, just for those to be squashed. I mean, I can, but I don't think it's necessary.
- charcircuit 5y agoIt that case you can put in the detailed commit messages later. So when you are doing your squash you type in the detailed commit.
- mnahkies 5y agoI wish that github would stick multiple commit messages into the default pr body - if I have a single commit it'll prefill the pr body from its message, but have a series of commits it won't. Should use the same rules as it's default squash message IMO
- kevincox 5y agoGutHub support for reviewing multiple commits is basic (to be generous). The focus is all on the "PR" the entire diff and the description (that lives outside of git). I think this is pretty harmful to having a useful git history and a conspiracy theorist would likely say that it is intentional lock-in.
- mnahkies 5y agoI'd love to be able to browse pr's commit by commit marking files as viewed, and then ideally have this bubble through to the holistic change view