Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by superbaconman 1226 days ago
> What does that user need to hear? Not which file or subsystem was changed. But the reason there is a change in the first place.

Doesn't that belong in the code itself? Do we really want the intention of a change to sit under multiple levels of blame?
2 comments
masklinn 1226 days ago
> Doesn't that belong in the code itself? Do we really want the intention of a change to sit under multiple levels of blame?

Yes? How would you encode the reasons for a change and for the way the change was implemented in code, dozens of lines of comments and ending up with files which are 90% comments floating in the void long detached from any code they were relevant to (and which may not even exist anymore)?

link
ivan_gammel 1226 days ago
It’s called traceability of requirements and is important part of post-release QA. At any given moment of time it must be possible to understand the reason for change down to a single line of code.
link
zaroth 1226 days ago
That’s lovely and all, but can’t be a commit message, which is primarily about succinct human understanding and setting context.

A commit can certainly have computer readable metadata I presume!

link
masklinn 1226 days ago
> That’s lovely and all, but can’t be a commit message

Of course it can.

> which is primarily about succinct human understanding and setting context.

You do know there is essentially no limit to how long a commit message is right?

link