![]() ![]() It is ok, within the branch, to retain multiple commits that represent distinct steps you made in development. ![]() squashing in wip and todo message commits. You may wish to squash here sometimes, e.g. masterĭuring your development you commit 'early and often' and with quick 'disposable' messages. your work added to the mainline branch, e.g.Small pieces mean easier code reviews, easier unit testing, better opportunity to qa, better alignment to Single Responsibility Principle, etc.įor the practicalities of when to actually do such squashes, there are basically two distinct stages that have their own workflow Add 'backend' code to make field available for views. Add 'backend' code in controller for when id is passed in url.Ħ256ac24426. Add field to database, add indexes and a trigger for the dw groupĩ458947548g. ![]() However experience has shown me that (depending on organizational size and complexity) a more granular path might be: fgfd7897899. Either they exist or they don't! Doesn't seem to make sense to break it out. However this can often highlight the fact that the ticket under development is 'too big' and needs to be broken down into smaller pieces that can standalone, for example: 8754390gf87. If there are major milestones that represent distinct working stages it's still ok to have more than one commit per feature/task/bug. However I do not need or want that history as part of the final git history so I may squash my commits - but see notes below as to what this means on a development branch vs. I find that this leads me to frequently have commits that are "wip" (work-in-progress) or "part A done" or "typo, minor fix" where I am using git to help me work and give me working points that I can go back to if the following code isn't working out as I progress to get things working. You may also be adding to a commit log that already has hundreds or even thousands of commits and this will help keep the growing history short and concise. I think you can see the point of squashing commits generally and the same principle applies to pull requests - Readability of the History. 6589685988 Implemented pop-up to select language Whereas a more carefully managed and merged git log with a little additional focus on the messages for this might look like: 7hgf8978g9. Fixed slideshow display issue in ieĩ080gf6567. If you have already pushed it, then, for creating pull request you should force the changes on the remote branch after squashing operation as the histories of local and remote branches are different.So that you have a clear and concise git history that clearly and easily documents the changes done and the reasons why.įor example a typical 'unsquashed' git log for me might look like the following: 7hgf8978g9. Thus, it is best to squash on the local branch before pushing. The squashing process is dangerous if your branch has already been published in the remote repository. To achieve that you should to use interactive mode of the git rebase command described above. Squashing pull request means to combine all the commits in that request into one to make it easier to read and clean the history of the main branch. It is more convenient to have all of the commits combined into one. When you work on some new feature you make several intermittent commits in the history. Moreover, it helps you to avoid overwriting another developer's work by force pushing. force-with-lease is considered a safer option that will not overwrite the work done on the remote branch in case more commits were attached to it (for instance, by another developer). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |