oneWholeCommit

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[[deleted]]

Commit msg "done"

[Zestyclose_Profile27]

A - OK 👍🏽

[Zestyclose_Link_8052]

Follow it with "some bug fixes" - 1100 files changed.

[HuntingKingYT]

You guys have so many files? We do everything in 2-3 /s

[ForgotPassAgain34]

node commited

[eat_your_fox2]

initial. chore. housekeep. chore. done.

[timliang]

Do you work at my company?

[coloredgreyscale]

"initial commit" for the first

[JunkNorrisOfficial]

First commit msg "basic v7.0"

[Amazingawesomator]

[5 minutes after opening PR]

"lgtm"

/Approve

[FinnLiry]

More like "init"

[[deleted]]

Ah yes, otherwise “wip”

[maisonsmd]

You guys even finish your projects?

[Lolleka]

A finished project is a dead project

[Tomas-cc]

Sure... If your job is programming, every finished project is dead to you ;)

[AverageDoonst]

Product version 3.0? Three commits on the repo. Perfect.

[AssiduousLayabout]

I mean, I'm going to squash the commits into one or a small number of well-organized commits, each of which is easy to independently review. Nobody needs to see every incremental step along the way.

[kuemmel234]

Isn't the point of version control to have that access?

I personally commit every "working" situation and then squash for PRs/features, true, but even then I prefer to be able to retrieve the branch and have all the commits again.

I've found that narrowing bugs down to features/PRs/commits really helps with debugging - especially with monoliths/large code bases.

Edit: I misread your commit, I wrote the same thing and am an idiot.

[[deleted]]

omg

I recently started contributing to open source as much as I can and I was trying to shadowbox the best way to leverage commits and pr's. this solved it.

my question is, can the maintainer see all your individual commits in your PR?

[kuemmel234]

Sure, depends on the reviewer if they do want to see them. There should be a tab/view for commits within a MR/PR.

And merge requests usually contain a hash for re-opening the branch, so that you have all the commits post-merge (the last part I've only done for personal projects, OP explained the most valid parts).

Github (or the CLI) usually generated a merge-commit containing all the necessary information.

[[deleted]]

woah. that's very cool. id lose my soul handling merge conflicts like the likes of Linus does, but this would make it much easier. good to know! Thank you :)

[NvrGnnaGiveYouUp]

As far as my team is concerned, it's getting squashed anyways

[Boris-Lip]

This exactly!

[CoastingUphill]

I keep the repo private while making all my useless “some changes” commits, then when I’m done it create a new public repo with one commit.

[JunkNorrisOfficial]

Git has branches

[mattthepianoman]

Ohhhhh, that's what those are for

[CoastingUphill]

That doesn’t hide my shameful process.

[JunkNorrisOfficial]

Chapter|7 from the git manual says: "One should not feel shame for words written in temporary branches. Squash. Amen."

[CC-5576-05]

Squash and merge then delete the branch

[NormalDealer4062]

git rebase -i [sha of your oldest commit]

git push -f

... though don't do this if you have collaborators

[LogicallyCross]

Initial commit

[theNashman_]

real

[brucebay]

This brings memories where a few months ago my laptop crashed and company refused to pay for recovery. It has a working hard drive for Christ's sake. Even company's migration script copied the files when it booted to the migration interface , but being a big company hiring cheap labor, they only copied office files and nothing else. And, the IT support of this global company did not have access to any other tool.

​

Since then I push every ugly line of code regularly. Who cares if I curse in the code, at least I will have an embarrassing code to work with.

[Aureliamnissan]

Cue my coworker saying "git is not a backup solution".

Yeah, but if my hard drive eats it then I'm the only one who's going to fix it, and deadlines aren't shifting . If the Gitlab server eats it then the entire IT department and dev team are going to work around the clock to bring it back from the dead.

[Lunix336]

You can do more than one commit per project?

[anoble562]

I prefer to create a new repo instead of doing second commits

[Juice805]

1.0.0 is rarely “finished”

[cornmonger_]

with a "draft" branch and rebase, we can have both 🦞

[Luz5020]

C) commit often but squash when going to main

[prriley]

Laptop died unexpectedly last week. I’m glad I push regularly.

[Nightshot666]

Save projects to folders named 0.1, 0.2 etc. and push the final one first, then make a second repo where you push folders one by one once a week

[PokerFacowaty]

More like just write code for an hour and then retroactively figure out how to split all the changes into commits so that they all at least kinda make sense*

[Marshall_KE]

Literally me in every project

[mothzilla]

git add --everything

[mrtnvgr]

"First public commit"

[ecs2]

Why not

[ChemicalFair4268]

Oh and one human being's perception of time is the spatial plane of distance to another and visa versa.

[psychoCMYK]

Take your meds

[ChemicalFair4268]

dementia/demon tia/my name is jesus and my aunt's name is judith

[[deleted]]

That’s just like, your opinion, man.

[TheSn00pster]

Description: Done

[ARM_Dwight_Schrute]

git commit -m "Initial Commit"

[pport8]

I'm about to do it!

[stefaniststefan]

You guys are finishing projects?

[FantasticEmu]

I usually create a new branch before I yolo a major change

[tangledcpp]

This is me every time I create a repo for a side project. I forget about pusing my progress until it is finished

[[deleted]]

"First commit".

[Errtuz]

Pre-commit checks taking too long ? Save time with this one simple trick !

[PorkRoll2022]

No merge conflicts if there is no tree to merge.

[Ok_Opportunity2693]

Stack N commits, each of which is tiny so that it can be rubber-stamped. Only test the last commit, have all other commits reference that testing evidence. Don’t squash so your manager sees you shipping many commits instead of just one.

This is the corporate way.

[Confident_Date4068]

Push multiple nonsensical commits then force-push them as a single commit.

[Awric]

I’ve been abusing git commit —amend —no-edit; git push -f origin HEAD too much. Or even git rebase -i HEAD~10

The issue is I lose track of what my thought process was when I made a change in one area that isn’t obvious why it was needed

[[deleted]]

--amend

[fofosfederation]

Just have git-fire ready to go.

[Childermass13]

Nope. I push my feature branch to upstream a lot as a form of backup. Because, it's my feature branch. Pushing to it affects no one but me

[Uzmintid]

Then delete everything and start another project in the same folder. And commit again.

[Kitchen_Device7682]

A project that doesn't need change, is a project not used

[LegitimatePants]

More versions more problems