|
Top-level
@darius I generally agree, but I have a caveat to add there When you feel the urge to write a lot in the commit message, a part of it should probably go into a comment in the code instead, so that the reasoning behind a piece of code is directly accessible there Description why/how something *is* -> code comment 2 comments
@darius I see the git history as something that might not always be available. For example, when generating a classic tarball with automake's make dist, the .git directory is usually stripped off I run Gentoo on my personal machines. I more than once had to investigate why a package suddenly broke compilation on an update (especially when I have set an uncommon set of USE flags). I usually have to dive into the code there and that's usually from a release tarball without git repo |
Gregory's Server
@DrMcCoy I've found myself moving away from verbose comments in projects where commits are verbose - the understanding becomes that every line of code has rich metadata you can inspect via git blame etc. Still not sure where I land on the correct distribution of information.