+1 on the proposal but echo Yufei's take on more committer attention required on PR merge.
Two things worth checking: 1. PR titles can arrive truncated like #17360 but committers can help rewrite at merge. 2. PR bodies carry more content than typical commit bodies, like @dependabot usually bring the embedded html and sometimes @mentions. Those markup does not tend to read well in git log. Hongyue Zhang On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 10:41 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >>> >>
