8 ms·
In my opinion PR/changeset description is exactly what should be in the commit description. In cases were we had 1 commit per PR (i.e. squashing before merging)
by ickyforce 3y ago
In my opinion PR/changeset description is exactly what should be in the commit description. In cases were we had 1 commit per PR (i.e. squashing before merging) just copying the PR description into merge commit worked really well - the goal for a PR description and a commit is essentially the same.
I wish github allowed to make the copying automatic and ensure that it happens (it doesn't, unfortunately).
If someone wants to learn the full history - the remarks during code review, perhaps all the WIP commits - they can read the PR/code review comments. I found it to be very rarely needed.
- arccy 3y agosettings > allow squash merging > default commit message > pull request title and description
- ickyforce 3y agoOh, nice, thanks. I haven't been using github recently, it looks like this option was added ~1.5y ago.
- sgerenser 3y agoThis is exactly how Microsoft Azure DevOps works when you enable the squash-on-merge behavior (which is how we used it while working at Microsoft). I thought this was completely logical and I'm surprised that GitHub can't be configured the same way. All of our commit messages were nice, long and detailed, with a link back to the PR if you really wanted to go back and see the individual commits and/or discussion that occurred on that PR. I think I only looked at individual commits maybe once or twice since they were usually useless in isolation (woops, WIP, fix typo, etc.).