4 ms·

Also PRs belong to the review and CI system, everything needed to understand the code and its history should be staged in version control

• darkwater 4y ago
  I agree and this sounds super neat but in reality it's pretty complicated to keep that boundary and not leak info from one side to the other. I mean, when you open a PR you will probably describe the rationale for the change and why you had to touch files A,B & C (if it's not obvious). You can and you should replicate that info in a multi-line commit message but sometimes through code review you reshape the code structure or even some of the requirements (most probably because there was some initial misunderstanding). So, since we are humans, it's normal to take shortcuts when we did already "a good enough job" and leave out those small details. Anyway I agree that we should aim at this: PRs are in the CI/review land, why a commit is like it is, should go into VC.