this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
1 points (53.8% liked)

JetBrains

71 readers
6 users here now

A community for discussion and news relating to JetBrains and its products! https://www.jetbrains.com/

Related Communities

Copyright Β© 2000-2024 JetBrains s.r.o. JetBrains and the JetBrains logo are registered trademarks of JetBrains s.r.o.

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
1
After seeing people use the UI to commit to git I understand where all those - sorry: shitty - commit messages come from.... (phpc.social)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

After seeing people use the @jetbrains UI to commit to git I understand where all those - sorry: shitty - commit messages come from....

πŸ™ˆ

An improvement would already be to have a "Subject" line and the text box.

And have the subject line follow the Beams Rule.

Sonthat the first line of the commit message finishes the sentence

"When this commit is applied it will..."

And please: No longer than 56(?) characters (Unicode). Keep it short. You got the textbox to explain *why* in full length.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I mean, I've been doing this for over a decade too. If teams are losing data from their issue tracker or source forge, that's a deep problem and not something that can be ameliorated by writing better commit messages.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They are hard to discover… and hard to use.

Flippin' fantastic, that's exactly what I want out of my documentation tooling.

I absolutely agree it would be better if forge data were part of the repo itself rather than separate. But for teams that are using a forge in the standard way, they should rely on the forge for this sort of thing, rather than hide important information in an obscure git feature.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@BatmanAoD It all depends on the maturity of the toolchain... and the longtime availablility of the external dependencies 😁

And. I no longer trust them further than I can spit... πŸ™ˆ

But YMMV 😁

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"trust them" meaning trust github and gitlab?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@BatmanAoD Whatever tool people are using for their issues and/or PRs and/or VCS

And it's not about trusting the tool but trusting that the tool will always be available. Whether due to discontinuation of the tool itself or due to discontinued use of the tool and replacement by something else...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

To be clear, you're saying you trust git metadata to be preserved even when forge/issue-tracking/etc metadata is not?

I suppose that's probably the case more often than not. I think it's still preferable to trust the forge you use than to spend any significant amount of time or effort trying to ensure that the team has strong enough commit-message discipline to compensate for the risk of losing data in an issue-tracker or forge.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

@BatmanAoD so far I have seen more issue-trackes come and go than VCSs...

So yes: Training developers in commit-discipline would for me not be wasted time and money.

Cause from what I have seen so far the question is not *whether* the issue tracker changes but *when*.

But OTOH: That's just me (and some companies I worked at).

YMMV