Why large companies and fast-moving startups are banning merge commits

Re:Why large companies and fast-moving startups are banning ... by BeefDinnerPurge on Friday December 29, 2023 @03:28PM (#38809826)

It seems like git itself ought to be able to combine multiple commits into a single ubercommit for the sake of PRs, but allow pulling each of those sub-commits that constituted it in the first place afterwards for debugging and QA purposes. But I guess these 3d party tools achieve that as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why large companies and fast-moving startups are banning ... by sam_bristow on Friday December 29, 2023 @04:33PM (#38810449)

You can basically achieve that with a rebase then merge with --no-ff. You can then just bisect etc with "first-parent" to see the big chunks as they're landed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why large companies and fast-moving startups are banning ... by dfawcus on Friday December 29, 2023 @04:36PM (#38810483)

It does, if you interact at the CLI, where a "PR" concept does not exist.

   git diff ^initial-commit~1 final-commit

However for that to be available after a contribution has been included in the master branch, one has to use merge commits.

Otherwise there are no inherent markers as the graph has been flattened in to a linear sequence. One then has to make use of external tools, or commit comment conventions to recreate what was actually done or intended.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why large companies and fast-moving startups are banning ... by feanaro on Friday December 29, 2023 @04:49PM (#38810631)

YES. I've been saying that for years. The fact that it doesn't work this way is really pretty braindead.

[ Parent | on HN ]