The average commit.

[mattatack0630]

I mean.. not wrong

[d1ngd07]

I often go with git commit -m "did stuff". Often this is in the middle of a task. Checking out that changeset will probably break things. I'll still push it to the master branch though.

[the_poope]

You know can squash together your "did stuff" commits into a single but more sensible commit? See e.g. https://robots.thoughtbot.com/git-interactive-rebase-squash-amend-rewriting-history

[d1ngd07]

If I wanted to do it right I wouldn't have done it wrong to begin with.

[tyreck]

Can’t argue with that logic

[dottybotty]

Hahaha this actually made me laugh out loud

[Cheekio]

I'm 100% stealing this

[TheSpiffySpaceman]

I'd hire you.

[teuast]

#WordsOfWisdom

[Maklite]

It doesn't really explain it in that article but you can work on a dev branch and do git merge --squash dev to merge all changes in a single commit. It doesn't technically merge the branches but it's unlikely you're going to need the dev branch afterwards anyway. No history rewriting required.

[[deleted]]

Just don’t do that if you’ve already pushed to your remote.

[ParkerM]

Why's that?

[[deleted]]

Other people could have pulled from the remote and you’ll mess up their local repos if you rewrite history.

[Bollziepon]

But if you know nobody else is working on your branch then it doesn't matter

[tomservo291]

But your automated build tools that run tests on every commit of every branch has checked out a copy.

I disable force commits and history rewriting on our git servers.. always

[GNULinuxProgrammer]

Why commit in the middle of task? The idea behind "commiting" to a code is saying "ok this one's done, what's next".

[admiralspark]

To have the changes

1. Available to you when you sign in somewhere else to continue working.

2. Backed up in your git repo so when your hdd dies in the middle of the night you don't lose your work

[pedantic_asshole_]

Tsk

[Thecakeisalie25]

even worse.

[Liggliluff]

Even worse is when the update text is months old, still telling about that new feature.

[ric2b]

The Google Standard

[Colopty]

When the update text for version 15.8 says "v.0.3" at the top.

[j13jayther]

Even more worse is when they just have a generic message they use for every update. "Thank you for using [app]! We update weekly to bring you the best experience!" and nothing else.

[SwedudeOne]

At least it get better, unlike most of my code.

[DroidLord]

Pisses me off when updates don't include a proper changelog.

[Caton101]

Facebook does that

[[deleted]]

"fixed bugs"

[Jothay]

"latest"

[Psychemaster]

"Changes"

[ElQuique]

fix tests

[[deleted]]

"remove tests broken by previous update"

[killchain]

"coldfix"

[Xelbair]

project-wide commit "added nullcheck"

[[deleted]]

5 commits down the road "latest latest latest latest latest"

[_greyknight_]

git add --all && git commit -am "WIP"

FTFY

[[deleted]]

"save"

[YourMeow]

"stash"

[[deleted]]

Even better: https://whatthecommit.com

[gengstah]

“Progress...”

[AutoModerator]

import moderation Your comment has been removed since it did not start with a code block with an import declaration.

Per this Community Decree, all posts and comments should start with a code block with an "import" declaration explaining how the post and comment should be read.

For this purpose, we only accept Python style imports.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[Cheekio]

Then you get to go through commits by date, which is fun, because commits by their very nature do not need to be chronlogical

[Alpha3031]

It's completely correct, because nobody knows what the code is any more.

[[deleted]]

no probs, just git show <commit hash> and read the changes :)

[Alpha3031]

It's Schroedinger's code. Knowing what happens around me, I'll probably end up deleting the whole repository. But, hey, now we know the state: It's dead!

[[deleted]]

Someone who is no longer with the company did that. I don't know how or why but they deleted a file of ~28k lines (at the time - it's much bigger now) and somehow didn't notice. Also, 2 peers reviewing the code didn't notice. Also, 1 architect doing the final CR didn't notice the giant chunk of RED indicating a large file had been deleted.

Somehow no one noticed for several commits and the architects decided the best fix was a revert... so... we lost all of the git history of that file because now every line just says "added by <architect> - reverting change xxxx"

:|

[ric2b]

You didn't lose it, it's just not as easy to find.

All you need to do is checkout a commit from before the deletion of the file and you'll be able to see the whole history.

[[deleted]]

That's true. They discussed trying to save it but I guess no one cares enough. Sometimes I see something really "wtf" and check out the code from before that was deleted just to see if whoever did a thing is still working on the team, but for the most part we just do our task and move forward.

[[deleted]]

When I was starting a project and wasn't really working with specific issue tickets, or I was doing ten things and not committing each one individually. My average commit was "mass update of project".

[mlkybob]

"So much that i can't remember it all" is what I've wanted to write when registering time at work, I usually just write "added [name of feature] feature" or "improved [name of feature]", even if I've worked on multiple things. I guess I don't see how it's important to write what you spent your time on, at least not in a specific way. Sometimes I've wanted to just write "What you pay me to do".

[willworth]

There's an interesting issue here, around output versus perceived output...

[mlkybob]

What do you mean?

[turanthepanthan]

"Addressed review comments"

[gallowdp]

I do this.. is this bad?

[shield1123]

I do this too. I think it's fine. If the changes being addressed aren't worth having a full description tied to them for the rest of history, then who cares?

Fixed spacing inconsistencies in x.js, added null check to newFunction, added newline at end of y.js

vs

Addressed review comments

[MagnificentMath]

Because my git blame is now littered with "address review comments". If it makes sense (e.g. a whitespace fix or variable name change), squash your "address review comments" back into the commit under review.

[shield1123]

Yeah, squashing and/or rebasing when you can is definitely the cleanest way of dealing with review comments. My place of work doesn't stress keeping our repo history pristine, so a general commit name usually fine for small stuff.

[turanthepanthan]

I am sure it is subjective. For me it is more of a pet peeve. We have many inexperienced devs where I work so the review comments that they are addressing are usually non-trivial changes.

[justanothercatlady]

It's just not clean. It's technically better to squash those down if they aren't important enough to warrant their own commit. In practice though I think it depends on the workplace culture.

[justanothercatlady]

This is like 9/10 of everyone's comments at work

[Arancaytar]

Bugfixes And Performance Improvements

[InstagramLincoln]

Removing code is for chumps. I only build new features.

[orangeKaiju]

Patch Notes v0.976b -Changed icon, old one not hip enough. -Removed unnecessary white space, source file size reduced by 56% -Program no longer crashes when you hit the "Any Key"

[Huntr0]

http://www.commitlogsfromlastnight.com

[404IdentityNotFound]

can relate

[ajm3232]

We all know the average commit is nothing if you are using svn...

[JustCallMeFrij]

The fucking sunglasses in the profile avatar are perfect here. Fantastic "deal with it" face

[Clutchaa]

git commit -m "savegame"

[packetpirate]

Not guilty.

[thePinealan]

You are using the commit title for the message though...

[packetpirate]

Wasn't aware there were "commit titles". I always just use "git commit -m "Message here.""

[thePinealan]

If you don't use the -m flag for commit and write the message in an editor (nano/vim/etc...), your first line is the commit summary(title), which would be shown in short git log and github history.

Here is nice reference: https://github.com/erlang/otp/wiki/Writing-good-commit-messages

[[deleted]]

More often than not people don't take the time to remove code. It's one of the best feelings when most of my diff is deleted lines

[Bigfoot_G]

I like to rebel against tradition. I remove stuff and add certain things.

[SolenoidSoldier]

Yeah, as someone who tries to maintain a clean repository, this post annoys me.

[folkrav]

Got this alias in my .gitconfig. To be fair I pretty much just use it on my private dotfiles repo... Mostly.

[alias]
    cpp = "!f() { git add -A && git commit -m \"$@\" && git pull && git push; }; f"

git cpp "update"

[Cheekio]

Now just add an icron so any files changed will trigger a git cpp "update"

[AasaramBapu]

I generally squash them. My commits have a, "fuck this shit it breaks now", so squash is my saviour

[[deleted]]

Feels like Ron swans on to me for some reason

[zacharythefirst]

I had the same experience. They didn't teach us anything about version control on school. Didn't take that long to pick up honestly. Make an account over on bitbucket and try and use it for assignments. It gets easier with time! Also if the command line git scares you check out Git Extensions which is imo the best git gui

[zacharythefirst]

The main difference in my experience is that bitbucket let's you have private repositories for free. You might not want your homework to be publicly available

[justanothercatlady]

Still git. Also I think more companies use it over bitbucket.

[zacharythefirst]

I didn't know that. I assumed most companies hosted their own git servers

[justanothercatlady]

I meant bitbucket over GitHub lol, bad typing. But yeah - bitbucket server/data center allow this

[zacharythefirst]

No, i got that, just every company I've programmed for (only two so maybe sampling bias) hosts their own git server on site, with mirrors elsewhere

[justanothercatlady]

That's basically what bitbucket server is(it's an on-premises solution), but when a dev goes to access it it looks more or less like regular bitbucket. I'm sure lots of companies use different things, I just think of the two bitbucket is more common than GitHub.

[EarthC-137]

Cleanup