3 ms·

> do the work first, clean up the commits later I'm not sure this gives the right impression. Yes rename/squash/interactive rebase if necessary to tidy, howeve

by agd 5y ago

> do the work first, clean up the commits later I'm not sure this gives the right impression. Yes rename/squash/interactive rebase if necessary to tidy, however I still believe you should strive to create clear, separate commits as you go. If you have to regularly make major changes to history before review, I could be a sign that your process/approach is disorganised.

okl 5y ago
> If you have to regularly make major changes to history before review, I could be a sign that your process/approach is disorganised. Right. Next time think before do.
ninkendo 5y ago
> If you have to regularly make major changes to history before review, I could be a sign that your process/approach is disorganised. Of course my process is disorganized! I'm an extremely disorganized person. I like to try out wild tangents in my coding, experimenting with some crazy idea or another and saving my place before and after I do so. I even have a separate .txt file of stream-of-consciousness writing about my coding, to keep track of the tremendous amount of complexity I have to deal with on a regular basis. My reflog reads like a personal diary of failings, dead-ends, "FINALLY COMPILES!" commits, etc etc. I use `git branch someNewBranch` really often, keeping a namespace of local branches under the name `deadend/*` to mark tombstones of approaches I tried in code but didn't work out, and I `reset --hard` back to a previous commit after I save the branch. I like it this way, it maps better to my totally disorganized brain. But I'm also a firm believer that none of my colleagues should be able to tell how disorganized all of this is, because by the time I make a PR, I squash it all down and write a very long, detailed commit message of what exactly I did, why I'm doing it, and how it works (sometimes, albeit rarely, spread across multiple logical commits in one PR.) They never get to see my private commit history. Why does it matter to anyone how much I have to prune my commit history before a PR? That's like complaining to another student in class that their short-form handwriting is hard to read, in their own personal notes they're taking during class, when said student is acing all the tests. It's simply not the metric you should be judging people on.

by agd 5y ago

okl 5y ago

> If you have to regularly make major changes to history before review, I could be a sign that your process/approach is disorganised. Right. Next time think before do.

ninkendo 5y ago

> If you have to regularly make major changes to history before review, I could be a sign that your process/approach is disorganised. Of course my process is disorganized! I'm an extremely disorganized person. I like to try out wild tangents in my coding, experimenting with some crazy idea or another and saving my place before and after I do so. I even have a separate .txt file of stream-of-consciousness writing about my coding, to keep track of the tremendous amount of complexity I have to deal with on a regular basis. My reflog reads like a personal diary of failings, dead-ends, "FINALLY COMPILES!" commits, etc etc. I use `git branch someNewBranch` really often, keeping a namespace of local branches under the name `deadend/*` to mark tombstones of approaches I tried in code but didn't work out, and I `reset --hard` back to a previous commit after I save the branch. I like it this way, it maps better to my totally disorganized brain. But I'm also a firm believer that none of my colleagues should be able to tell how disorganized all of this is, because by the time I make a PR, I squash it all down and write a very long, detailed commit message of what exactly I did, why I'm doing it, and how it works (sometimes, albeit rarely, spread across multiple logical commits in one PR.) They never get to see my private commit history. Why does it matter to anyone how much I have to prune my commit history before a PR? That's like complaining to another student in class that their short-form handwriting is hard to read, in their own personal notes they're taking during class, when said student is acing all the tests. It's simply not the metric you should be judging people on.