3 ms·
I agree. I decided years ago that that was a lot of work for little or no benefit. It's enough for the tests to pass at each merge point.
by mjd 1y ago
I agree. I decided years ago that that was a lot of work for little or no benefit.
It's enough for the tests to pass at each merge point.
- baq 1y ago…and that’s why squash merge should be the default setting in PRs.
- eru 1y agoYes, it should be the default, but ideally you have the option of preserving history (for PRs where that makes sense) and then your CI/CD should also check that the individual commits build and pass tests. In general, your CI/CD should make sure that each commit that appears in the 'public' history of main builds and passes tests.
- WorldMaker 1y agoYou can `git bisect --first-parent` just fine without needing to squash.
- Supermancho 1y agoI would say most workplaces have settled similarly. Sit in draft until you're ready to use the CI - which you verified locally or run manually in draft, before convert to reviewable - then review, maybe tweak, merge. Atomic commits would endanger me losing unfinished work or eventual dead-ends with no record. This seems inefficient.