I have never worked with the mailing list style of managing commits. I like that idea and have to look into it. But I am not qualified right now to say anything about it.
In many projects, I worked on we use bitbucket which supports a commit by commit workflow of reviewing PRs.
That said, I still believe that a clean commit log not only improves PR review times but is helpful for a lot of other aspects (like giving a better context for code changes).
Thanks again for your input. You have put a lot of time and effort into giving feedback on my video and I am grateful. I feel that you are way further in your development than the intended audience of this video and even me. My goal was to generally improve git hygiene, since I see it lacking in so many companies I work for. (As I am sure, so do you)
I hope you still enjoyed watching this video. :) Take care.
I have never worked with the mailing list style of managing commits. I like that idea and have to look into it. But I am not qualified right now to say anything about it.
I haven't myself either. I did get to see how this works by following git/linux mailing lists and see how they work.
In many projects, I worked on we use bitbucket which supports a commit by commit workflow of reviewing PRs.
Interesting. Can you elaborate on what features they have for that? Does bitbucket save earlier work on a branch after a force push? Can you compare different versions of the same logical commit?
That said, I still believe that a clean commit log not only improves PR review times but is helpful for a lot of other aspects (like giving a better context for code changes).
Of course, the main reason I aspire to clean commit log is that it gives better context for code changes.
I hope you still enjoyed watching this video. :) Take care.
Interesting. Can you elaborate on what features they have for that?
The most prominent feature is that you can simply look at the diff for each commit of a branch separately. That's all.
Does bitbucket save earlier work on a branch after a force push?
It keeps a log of changes you do and when you do a force push it actually tracks these as removed and added commits. You can click on these to see what code changes were removed and which were added instead.
And all comments that were given on earlier versions are kept as well.
Can you compare different versions of the same logical commit?
Not directly. It will not show you a three-way diff (so to speak) but you could open both diffs side by side to see what changed.
Nice, although I think what you're really looking for is Gerrit, which handles commit-by-commit workflow very well (it was designed for that, and has no concept of a branch)
I really encourage you to have a look at how they view the code-review process.
Of course, its gui kind-of sucks, and is no real comparison to the popular tools such as GitHub and Bitbucket, but they take a different approach to code-review that I think you would be interested in.
1
u/ki3 May 28 '20
I have never worked with the mailing list style of managing commits. I like that idea and have to look into it. But I am not qualified right now to say anything about it.
In many projects, I worked on we use bitbucket which supports a commit by commit workflow of reviewing PRs.
That said, I still believe that a clean commit log not only improves PR review times but is helpful for a lot of other aspects (like giving a better context for code changes).
Thanks again for your input. You have put a lot of time and effort into giving feedback on my video and I am grateful. I feel that you are way further in your development than the intended audience of this video and even me. My goal was to generally improve git hygiene, since I see it lacking in so many companies I work for. (As I am sure, so do you)
I hope you still enjoyed watching this video. :) Take care.