Also a reasonably weak -1, atomic updates to tests / docs / code is a good thing, the tags are pretty much always inconsistent, they arent actually useful for anything and additional steps are just another barrier
I have been asking people to avoid it on any codebases I review for On 4 December 2013 16:47, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > Jason makes a compelling argument. > > Let's say you do three commits on a feature branch: > > [code] Add foo widget to core > [tests] Add tests for foo widget > [docs] Add docs for foo widget > > What do you then use as a commit message when you squash and merge into > master? > > And let's say we want to accept a pull request on Github that adds foo > atomically. Are we really going to send the person away and ask them > to decompose the commit into many commits, each one with a tag? > > I think I've convinced myself that this should, at the most, be optional. > > On 4 December 2013 17:42, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > While I'm whining about tags: > > > > Tagging is most useful by having multiple tags per target. My blog post > can > > be tagged [vacation] [swaziland] [photos] [family], and then later I can > > find all posts about family. > > > > Git messages are forced to one tag. That's unhelpful because commits > > ideally update code, tests, and documentation. A useful tag might be [ui] > > but I could get the same thing by looking at the history of src/fauxton/. > > > > It is marginally useful at a very dear cost: 4-10 characters per commit > > message. > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Jason Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> -1 > >> > >> We do this at Nodejitsu and I find it tedious and unhelpful. It's a bit > of > >> ceremony with little benefit. For me at least, I never want to see "only > >> [foo] commits" I want to see "only commits in subdirectory foo/". > Otherwise > >> I see the commits through `git blame`. > >> > >> That's my opinion, but I am comfortable being overruled. > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected] > >wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I would like to propose that we start to tag our commits. The > reasonning > >>> behind that is to distinct easily the changes concerning the doc, the > ui > >>> and the core and filter them immediately and force us to make a change > >>> atomic. So I would like to propose that we tag the commit line with > >>> > >>> [DOC] > >>> [UI] > >>> [CORE] > >>> > >>> other ? Another way to distinct the changes would also be to have all > of > >>> these as subprojects eventually but it may require too much changes. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> - benoit > >>> > >> > >> > > > > -- > Noah Slater > https://twitter.com/nslater >
