Comments by "Dmittry" (@Dmittry) on "ByteByteGo" channel.

  1. We squash our personal PRs and merge our team branch to main. To update my branches I prefer rebase . But rebase is not so good if several people work on the same branch.
    118
  2.  @z0nx  Using GUI help to understand the process much better. I agree.
    8
  3.  @dale3478  Yes, if you work on the branch alone, then rebasing is the best option I think. Very clean. But if someone else also works on the same branch things become more complicated. You should be very careful with impact on others. And Pull, Pull, Pull 😁
    7
  4.  @etexas  That's not how Git is intended to be used. If you work on the branch only by yourself then you can do whatever you want. If somebody else also wants to add something... I would prefer to see it as a separate commit in my branch. "...big pull requests, I'd say that is a planning failure" - yeah, yeah, theoreticians. Real world is not always the way as they imagine it to be.
    6
  5. Yeah, grandma will be disappointed if there will be no lambdas. How can any project exist without lambdas?
    5
  6.  @etexas  Why do you need step 2? You can squash your PR into one commit when you finally merge it. You can write a good message regardless of how many commits you have in the branch. You will see diff for all commits in PR. And you can use your commits to divide your work into smaller peaces. Other people can see messages of commits and what you've changed at every step. It will make review of big PRs easier. If you need to change something (let's say you've got comments and want to change variable name) what will you do? Commit and squash again? I don't understand the reason behind squashing commits before you merge them. It ruins the whole idea. It's the same as amend to one single commit every time. Then you don't need to squash anything, right?
    2
  7. Wait! How do you know my brilliant architecture for my books list?! Are you spying on me?
    1
  8.  @etexas  Squash before rebase? 🤯
    1
  9.  @etexas  And you initially said "squash before rebase", now you say "rebase, then squash, then merge". I'm lost.
    1