3 ms·
plus, you can tell who doesn't use git bisect because they prefer a single large commit across 500 files to keep history clean. As opposed to a series of small
by P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
plus, you can tell who doesn't use git bisect because they prefer a single large commit across 500 files to keep history clean.
As opposed to a series of small commits, that would make git bisect actually useful.
- dmatech 4y agoWhy can't we just have some kind of "virtual squash" where the commits are preserved, but they're grouped together so you could view it as a single squashed commit if that's preferable?
- mixmastamyk 4y agoYour features are not broken down enough if one ticket requires hundreds of changes.
- giancarlostoro 4y agoThis is a solid argument. Except in cases where you're upgrading everything in a small to mid sized codebase that needs a major dependency updated that affects everything from syntax to other things, and cannot be done discretely.
- mixmastamyk 4y agoFor a Python 2 to 3 migration a few years back we did it in a branch with many commits. We didn't obsess about telling a story we just got the work done and the tests passing. Before this there was some work to bring the codebase as close to 3.x paradigms as possible. As long as the two points before and after the work are copacetic we were satisfied. In that sense it was discreet.