|
|
|
|
|
|
by SOLAR_FIELDS
5 days ago
|
|
|
> It is fundamentally important that convential commit is better for adopting it to be an improvement. Absolutely! Which means we can also agree that conventional commit is objectively better than No System For Their Commits At All, which is what 99.9% of people are actually choosing between when evaluating conventional commit. They aren’t looking at conventional commit vs Some Better Way, they are looking at “we have no standardization of commit messages” vs “we have standardization of commit messages”. For the 0.1% people for whom that’s not good enough, one hundred percent agree that these people should be pursuing better solutions. |
|
|
I was quite clear you are presupposing it is better without actually justifying that.
"Some standard is better than no standard" isn't generally true, it has some requirements.