The latter is, of course, wrong as it makes the repo history harder to read, while on the other hand the former improves readability.
The latter is, of course, wrong as it makes the repo history harder to read, while on the other hand the former improves readability.
Personally, how I tend to work is if there’s some link between commit and ticketing system I can refer to, it’s about the best you can expect.
An example is the "About branch begin-concurrent-pnu-wal2" at the top of the page https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?r=begin-concurrent-pnu-w... - the page shows all check-ins for the branch, and the Wiki at the top gives a summary of what that branch is about.
Another example is the detailed discussion in the "About" section for check-in https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/718ead555b09892f - important information that records the thinking about this commit but which seems too prolix for a check-in comment.
Let me know your thoughts on this idea.
In the last week I have been quite charmed by many of Fossil ideas, I will for sure try this feature too.