4 ms·
I don’t see it as too dogmatic. I see it as taking the ambiguity out of the decision whether to squash or not. Just always squash into master. There are plenty
by zomgwat 2y ago
I don’t see it as too dogmatic. I see it as taking the ambiguity out of the decision whether to squash or not. Just always squash into master. There are plenty of options to make creating PRs more lightweight.
Another nice thing with squashing is that merges into master always look the same regardless of individual engineer workflows.
- keybored 2y agoAny dogmatic decision could be described as taking the ambiguity out of decisions.
- zomgwat 2y agoSure. And that’s positive in the context of this thread.
- keybored 2y agoWe’ve discussed the downsides of having such a policy in this subthread. I want to have the choice to do a true merge or some other strategy. It’s a downside for me personally. Not having a choice doesn’t help me since it’s a meaningful choice in my book. As a policy. I leave this decision for others. People who prefer can squash-merge all the time if they want to.