News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong. Parent comment

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by nicolaslem on Monday November 06, 2023 @12:22PM (#38165521)
Sometimes when working on an old code base built by developers that came and went, one needs to perform what I call "code archeology": going back in time to understand why a feature was implemented the way it was.

Whether this is feasible at all depends largely on the care developers put in structuring their commits.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by ohwellhere on Monday November 06, 2023 @12:24PM (#38165559)
Yes! The source code is itself the first level of documentation. The commit history is the second.

A free form textual interface to document everything about why you made the changes you just made? Why not maximize the value of this resource!

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by Izkata on Monday November 06, 2023 @03:16PM (#38168326)
This has become a large chunk of my job over the past few years, as part of fixing/upgrading systems no one has touched in a decade, and none of those original people are still here. There are some weird things in there I've only been able to figure out because all the svn history still exists.
[ Parent | on HN ]