2 ms·
Yeah this sucks and is a failure of current source control tools IMHO. Bisect is a useful tool. Making commits that don’t compile, don’t pass tests, or don’t
by forrestthewoods 4y ago
Yeah this sucks and is a failure of current source control tools IMHO.
Bisect is a useful tool. Making commits that don’t compile, don’t pass tests, or don’t run is useful. Squashing commits is useful. Not squashing history is also useful.
There’s no technical reason we can’t have all these things.
- Karellen 4y ago> Making commits that don’t compile, don’t pass tests, or don’t run is useful. I'm not sure I agree with you there on that one.
- sulam 4y agoAn example is renaming a method that’s heavily used. It can be nice to have the first commit be the rename, and then the second commit be changing the usages. When you code review that, it makes your job easier. Trivial example but you can work up less trivial ones from there.