3 ms·
> if you only use commits as some sort of help while developing, you might as well just squash them before making a PR. yeah for sure you want to squash-merge
by kiitos 1y ago
> if you only use commits as some sort of help while developing, you might as well just squash them before making a PR.
yeah for sure you want to squash-merge every PR to main, right?
commits are just commits, there is no moral value to them, there is no "good history" or "bad history" of them, whether or not they're "made thoughtfully" isn't really interesting or relevant
git is just a tool, and commits are just a means to an end
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- g-b-r 1y ago> yeah for sure you want to squash-merge every PR to main, right? Oh god you're serious? > git is just a tool, and commits are just a means to an end To more ends than you realize, probably, if you put some care in making them
- kiitos 1y agoi just don't use commits like you do, and that doesn't mean i'm being less careful or less thoughtful, or that my changes are worse than yours commits are what i say they are, nothing more or less
- g-b-r 1y agoEveryone's free to do what he wants, of course, but I'm arguing that there are strong advantages in making good commits. Ok, good is subjective, I guess, so let's say commits with good descriptions, all the information that could be useful to understand what they do (and where appropriate, why), and a limited and coherent amount of modifications in each; in short, commits that are easy to follow and will provide what you need to know if you come back to them later.