[vaylian]

> This allows reviewers to step through your pull request in small bites, with each set of changes scoped to a single aspect of the feature.

Is that a frequent way of reviewing? On GitHub you get shown all changes together in the review tab. You can select individual commits for closer inspection, but where is the benefit?

[Balinares]

A series of piecemeal self-contained changes is much easier to wrap your brain around comprehensively enough to detect logic issues.

I started doing exactly this and it's been invaluable.

[vaylian]

How does this work for you UX-wise? Do you use github? Do you and your collaborators select each commit individually inside a pull request?

[Balinares]

We're a GitLab shop. The GitLab UI lets you read a PR commit by commit.

[steveklabnik]

See this gist (and the discussion) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41505266

[Yokohiii]

I suspect there is some weird habit that some people even like to overengineer their git history. Maybe it improves the pixel fame ratio or something.

For me it's satire. There are reasons for varying effort in creating PRs or patches, but attempts like this never seem to reason about reality. If I have to review, I want to see the code, not a clever story hidden in the commit history.

[jeltz]

Yes, it us common among people who use git and it makes reviews of complex features much easier.