3 ms·
Small question to anyone with this workflow. Do you (re)run CI on every affected commit? If no, what is the point of small commits if you lose any guarantees? I
by cocoto 2y ago
Small question to anyone with this workflow. Do you (re)run CI on every affected commit? If no, what is the point of small commits if you lose any guarantees? I much prefer the honest linear non-modified history.
- keybored 2y agoWhy do you ask that question as if that is the obviously most important factor? My history is read much more than it is checked out. And definitely much more than it is stress-tested by some CI. Readability matters more. I’m having a hard time imagining all the supposed “commit for coffee break” committers who also are die-hard bisect users that go nuts when someone doesn’t run the whole CI on every commit.[1] And if you don’t have that many commits to check because you “squash merge”: `git bisect start --first-parent` gives you exactly the same result.