I used CVS and ClearCase before moving into Git, and it took me some time to adjust to the fact that the cost of branching in Git is much much less than ClearCase. And getting into the “distributed” mindset didn’t happen overnight.

  • expr@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    If the MR is anything bigger than a completely trivial change in a file or 2, it most likely should be broken into multiple commits.

    A feature is not atomic. It has many parts that comprise the whole.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s excessively bureaucratic to the point of being useless in most cases.

        Hard and fast rules are generally bad and “squash everything” is pretty much a by definition hard and fast rule with the result being “I’m just not going to care that much about my commit messages.”

        • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          What are you on? Non-descriptive commit messages has never been any of our problems. All our commits that are pushed to the main branch are well written with clear issues linked to them.