undefined | Better HN

0 pointsEnPissant1y ago0 comments

That's a false dichotomy, lurker. A PR or a commit can be large or small.

0 comments

It's not a false dichotomy. They're just using different terms than you would, based on their experience with how the people around them use those systems.

EnPissantOP1y ago

It's comparing carefully manicured git history hacking to unregulated PRs. It's pure dogma.

Dylan168071y ago

You agree that they are making a real comparison between two different things.

But you also say it's pure dogma?

I'm confused.

EnPissantOP1y ago

>I loathe GitHub PRs because of this. Working at $dayjob the unit of change is the commit, and every commit is reviewed and signed off by at least 1 peer.

Because this is exactly what a squash merged PR is. There is no meaningful difference unless you say "but commits are done by good people and PRs are done by bad people".

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

Dylan168071y ago

It's not a false dichotomy. They're just using different terms than you would, based on their experience with how the people around them use those systems.

EnPissantOP1y ago

It's comparing carefully manicured git history hacking to unregulated PRs. It's pure dogma.

Dylan168071y ago

You agree that they are making a real comparison between two different things.

But you also say it's pure dogma?

I'm confused.

EnPissantOP1y ago

>I loathe GitHub PRs because of this. Working at $dayjob the unit of change is the commit, and every commit is reviewed and signed off by at least 1 peer.

Because this is exactly what a squash merged PR is. There is no meaningful difference unless you say "but commits are done by good people and PRs are done by bad people".

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse