Hacker News Reader

I've noticed that I split commits and make very verbose but clear messages for each commit, only to never use this afterwards.

Meanwhile my coworkers just commit with "lol" and get the same result. What I learned from this is that you don't need to split commits, just commit everything at once and add a "good enough" message. E.g. if you're working on a provider just use "Updated provider"

View on HN

What kind of stupid advice is that?

How do you want to roll back a change of a specific feature if multiple works are committed at once.

Everything at once is presumable a unit of work you can roll back.

I hope that is what they mean!

You migrate relevant parts of that diff into your workdir, test and commit.

Is it that hard? What is this question even? Do you lose consciousness and project awareness in these cases? Why someone must split all the work before it's needed, when it's only needed in 0.01% of all cases? Why wouldn't you do this job when the need to rollback arises? Good arguments for commit granularity exist, but this one makes little sense, like many others.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com