Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think that's a fair statement, at least based on my own experience. When I'm investigating how code arrived at a certain state, I'm looking primarily at the code.

The commit messages are nice as indicators of intent, but I don't rely on them. The real change is in the code, not what somebody remembered to write in a summary of the change.



Investigating code deltas tells you nothing about HOW the code got there. It's there. Someone committed it. But WHY? Hence, the commit message.

"new feature. fix it. fixed. lol. WIP. COMPILES NOW"

None of these tell you how the commits came to be other than that they are already there.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: