4 ms·
If it is unreleased it may make the life of reviewers easier. If they look at the commits at all, that is. But if not even reviewers are looking at commits I q
by nextaccountic 2y ago
If it is unreleased it may make the life of reviewers easier. If they look at the commits at all, that is.
But if not even reviewers are looking at commits I question whether a PR should be chunked in commits at all - why not squash all commits into a single one, so that every PR is composed of exactly one commit? Could maybe separating the changes in commits convey some information?
- toastal 2y agoNormally creating a new feature involves independent actions like updating dependency, refactoring some module beforehand, & so on. If these things can be broken up in a way that make review & reading logs easier, why would you squash the whole history—especially if that history is already good. In as much as it would be ridiculous to go to the other extreme of committing ever character/line as a separate commit, just collapsing the whole history isn’t a good approach. There isn’t a hardened rule about where the line is but that is okay & up to developer discretion on how they want to ‘tell the story’ to a reviewer (or their future self) about how certain chunks should be read together.