Readit NewsWhy do we care about commit messages? I only read them when rebasing.
With structured comments, you can even use the AI to fill out the PR template easily and precisely.
I'd posit that well-structured commits are principally for the benefit of the reviewer of the code. Order your commits in a fashion that makes sense narratively, and give them meaningful commit messages. Use interactive rebasing liberally if need be to accomplish this goal.
As a reviewer, you are well within your rights to decline a PR that consists of a single non-meaningful commit message and a +/- 1000 lines diff. Effort is expected from both parties in checking in code.
Compare the Linux commit history, every commit has its full context and explanation and they do not rely on external systems.
You can not avoid it all the time but maybe It's better to use the PR description for that purpose.
One word naming the topic or area or system that was changed, then colon separated with a very short sentence giving a summary of the changes, then two lines later (if necessary), a bullet point list of the most important/noteworthy changes, then an explanation for why a thing was changed (if any change in the commit warrants it).
Honestly, I know most people won't go beyond the first line, but I do find the rest of it very helpful for my own work if I have to go through the commits sometime in the future.
It also helps that most of it is optional and I decide on a case by case basis whether just the first line is sufficient or I need the whole thing.
I see in the comments people questioning the purpose of a bullet point list, but it actually is helpful. I don't want to have to check the diff for every single commit if I don't have to. It's time consuming. If a commit message can tell me immediately if it touched something I'm interested in, that's a big time and effort and mental bandwidth saver.
Example:
auth: Refactored and fixed edge cases
- Fixed incorrect handling of token groups
- Added role enum to replace static strings
Does anyone have similar feeling?
1. Request your data. Email idv-privacy@withpersona.com or privacy@withpersona.com. Under GDPR, they have 30 days to respond.
2. Request deletion. The verification is done. LinkedIn already has the result. There is no reason for Persona to keep your passport scan and facial geometry on their servers. Ask them to delete it.
3. Contact their DPO. dpo@withpersona.com — that’s their Data Protection Officer. If you want to object to them using your documents as AI training data under “legitimate interests,” this is where you do it.
4. Think twice before verifying. That blue badge might not be worth what you’re trading for it. A checkmark is cosmetic. Biometric data is forever.