About three years ago, I worked with Anton on a few PRs. Before merging, he always reviewed everything carefully, including the PR title, and made any necessary changes. I think that's a good habit to continue, so I've tried to do the same.
I'm supportive of having an explicit rule for things like this. At the same time, I'd encourage every committer to do a quick sanity check before merging. Rules help, but ultimately it's people who make the difference. Yufei On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 10:16 AM Neelesh Salian <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to this. Saw multiple such cases during the 1.11 release curation. > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 9:20 AM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey folks, >> >> I’m proposing that we change the GitHub squash-merge settings to populate >> the commit title and body from the PR’s title and description. >> >> The current settings may use the branch’s commit title and messages >> instead. This can produce unhelpful squash commits—such as “Initial >> commit”—and cause the commit history on main to differ from the PR >> content that was reviewed. >> >> Using the PR title and description would provide more consistent and >> useful commit history, regardless of how many commits a PR contains. >> >> More details: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/17467 >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks, >> Kevin >> >
