31–40 of 54 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your wife loves you very much and/or your nasty food poisoning had very nasty external effects.
> Your wife loves you very much That's generally the idea of marriage.
For a second I thought this was going to be an article about people who only allow squash-commits to their repo
I once had a nasty case of food poisoning from a zucchini salad that I made. I always assumed it was from not washing them properly or undercooking them, but maybe this was it! In any case, my wife still hates zucchini even though it’s been many years since that incident.
Your wife loves you very much and/or your nasty food poisoning had very nasty external effects.
When cooking zucchini it is worth chopping a slice in the middle and tasting it. If it’s bitter just throw it out. The worst is you cut 5 zucchini’s , and one bitter zucchini ruins your entire dish.
For a second I thought this was going to be an article about people who only allow squash-commits to their repo
Anyone have strong opinions about only allowing squash commits, vs allowing merge commits?
Having used both professionally, I don't think the benefits of squash commits only outweigh the hurdles for new developers. Merging is just easier, and I don't think the merge commits in master are really all that jarring?
For a second I thought this was going to be an article about people who only allow squash-commits to their repo
Was hoping for the same, so lets discuss... Anyone have strong opinions about only allowing squash commits, vs allowing merge commits? Having used both professionally, I don't think the benefits of squash commits only outweigh the hurdles for new developers. Merging is just easier, and I don't think the merge commits in master are really all that jarring?
On the other hand, limiting commits to do a single thing and having several per merged branch allows one to revert a problematic commit without conflicts or isolate a bug using git bisect.
For a second I thought this was going to be an article about people who only allow squash-commits to their repo
Was hoping for the same, so lets discuss... Anyone have strong opinions about only allowing squash commits, vs allowing merge commits? Having used both professionally, I don't think the benefits of squash commits only outweigh the hurdles for new developers. Merging is just easier, and I don't think the merge commits in master are really all that jarring?
That gets tricky too - what about features being developed by multiple engineers? Generally, I create a branch that embodies the full scope of work and devs treat that as the default branch while working on it - merging their branches into that one. That branch needs to be consistently rebased to be kept up to date in order to avoid conflicts, and devs will sometimes need to merge or rebase their own branches based on that branch. Usually, this isn't too complicated, unless someone buries their head in the sand for a little too long (pun intended.)
This also means that all CI jobs have to be configured to use the current branch rather than a static target - which makes logic a bit more complicated when dealing with things like E2E tests that create real environments.
What does it accomplish? A linear, well-constructed history and it ensures resilient CI jobs. The other side of that, is that the real product branch gets a very organized history, while feature development branches can have non-standard commit messages like, "I screwed up", and can allow force pushes that can't be done on my default branches. This allows for both clean history and me to not be policing people's commit messages. If you value none of those things, it's a total waste of time and energy.
For a second I thought this was going to be an article about people who only allow squash-commits to their repo
Was hoping for the same, so lets discuss... Anyone have strong opinions about only allowing squash commits, vs allowing merge commits? Having used both professionally, I don't think the benefits of squash commits only outweigh the hurdles for new developers. Merging is just easier, and I don't think the merge commits in master are really all that jarring?
That said, I've never experienced the burping side effect many report. Makes me very curious what's going on metabolically to cause some to burp but not others. Can gas produced by the microbiome of the upper tracts of the intensities make it back up into ones stomach?? All very fascinating regardless.