2 ms·
"Should" is a funny word. I push funky commits to development branches often, because I always try to sync my work to the git host at the end of the workday in
by metadat 4y ago
"Should" is a funny word. I push funky commits to development branches often, because I always try to sync my work to the git host at the end of the workday in case I wakeup to a non-functioning laptop the next morning. Better to have a risk of ugly commits in a wip branch than risk losing work.
> Temporary commits .. are not the ones you push out to review, right?
Fully agree with this; I am a clean freak and groom the entire branch differential into sets of atomic or related commits before submitting a merge request.
- eurasiantiger 4y agoHow often does someone go through your code commit-wise? What is the business value of grooming commits, if the reviewer only looks at the branch diff (as they very well should, lest they miss something in the big picture)?
- seba_dos1 4y agoI go through individual commits during review quite regularly. Sometimes it's enough to look at the diff of the whole branch, but sometimes it's much more manageable to look at individual commits for meaningful review.
- u801e 4y agoThey are valuable when using git blame to see the line in the context of the change it was part of and the associated commit message. That information could help avoid introducing a regression for example.
- seba_dos1 4y ago> I push funky commits to development branches often, because I always try to sync my work to the git host at the end of the workday I do that too, and also to get CI artifacts - but I consider that an "implementation detail" that doesn't affect any other part of the development process ;)