If the commit frequency goes down, does it really mean that the project is dying? Maybe it is just becoming stable?
Git commands I run before reading any code
141–150 of 546 posts
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#142> Is This Project Accelerating or Dying > > git log --format='%ad' --date=format:'%Y-%m' | sort | uniq -c If the commit frequency goes down, does it really mean that the project is dying? Maybe it is just becoming stable?
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#143> Is This Project Accelerating or Dying > > git log --format='%ad' --date=format:'%Y-%m' | sort | uniq -c If the commit frequency goes down, does it really mean that the project is dying? Maybe it is just becoming stable?
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
You gain the extra information by having reasonable commit messages rather than the ones you mentioned. To fix CI you force push. Can you explain to me what an avid squash-merger puts into the commit message of the squashed commit composed of commits "argh, let's see if this works", "crap, the CI is failing again, small fix to see if it works", and "pushing before leaving for vacation" ?
The squashed commit from the PR -> main will have a clean title + description that says what was added. Usually pretty close to what the PR title + description are actually, just without the videos and screenshots. Example: feat(ui): Add support for tagging users * Users can be tagged via the user page * User tags visible in search results (configurable) etc.. I don't need to spend extra time cleaning up my git commi…
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#145> Is This Project Accelerating or Dying > > git log --format='%ad' --date=format:'%Y-%m' | sort | uniq -c If the commit frequency goes down, does it really mean that the project is dying? Maybe it is just becoming stable?
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#146Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#147> git shortlog -sn --no-merges
Is the most egregious. In one codebase there is a developer's name at the top of the list who outpaced the number 2 by almost 3x the number of commits. That developer no longer works at the company? Crisis? Nope, the opposite. The developer was a net-negative to the team in more ways than one, didn't understand the codebase very well at all, and just happened to commit every time they turned around for some reason.
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#148I love how the author thinks developers write commit messages. All joking aside, it really is a chronic problem in the corporate world. Most codebases I encounter just have "changed stuff" or "hope this works now". It's a small minority of developers (myself included) who consider the git commit log to be important enough to spend time writing something meaningful. AI generated commit messages helps this a lot, if de…
In codebases where PRs are squashed on merge, the commit messages on the main branch end up being the PR body description text, and that's actually reviewed so tends to be much better I find.
I understand this isn't inline with traditional git scm, but it's a very powerful workflow if you are OK with some hybridization.
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#149> Is This Project Accelerating or Dying > > git log --format='%ad' --date=format:'%Y-%m' | sort | uniq -c If the commit frequency goes down, does it really mean that the project is dying? Maybe it is just becoming stable?
Re: Git commands I run before reading any code
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are those not just separate PRs? Or if they really needed to be merged at once - they should still be separate PRs but on a feature branch
Why have PRs - groups of commits to pull - then if all you need is a single patch file?
I feel like what you're arguing is that you should clean up your commits before anyone else sees them. Fair. But you could also clean it up right before merging to main. It's not that different, except the latter is much less annoying, particularly when going back and forth with people.
I know this is a very github centric workflow, but that's where most engineers work now, and it's nice and easy. This wouldn't work for eg: contributing to linux, but that's not what most of us do.