Multi-commit PRs vs. multiple single-commit PRs

Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed Mar 22 19:57:04 PDT 2017


On Wednesday, 22 March 2017 at 17:16:09 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> I'm a bit confused. This got settled a while ago, in part to 
> avoid silly debates over the inconsequential. Our organization 
> prefers squash before commit in the majority of cases. For a 
> minority of pull requests (that touch many files, are 
> semi-mechanical etc) multiple commits in one PR are fine within 
> reason. These would be about one order of magnitude less 
> frequent. -- Andrei

Well, I don't think we shouldn't keep researching for ways to 
improve wolkflow. I certainly don't think it's inconsequential, 
and anyone who has time and thinks they can bring fresh arguments 
to the table is welcome to do so.

There are some very solid arguments in favor of moving to an 
exclusively one-commit-per-PR model, with no exceptions (with 
more involved contributions occurring in feature branches), the 
main obstacle for which is that the tooling isn't there. I also 
think we can do better for the current model - the diff tab is 
often misused when reviewing per-commit is more appropriate.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list