It was a joke, I just prefer checkout.
matt-savvy
sodapopcan
I figured since the article reads like someone who started using git after swtich and friends were introduced. If that’s the case that’s interesting that someone would see checkout-for-everything as a positive. I do prefer it myself but only because that’s the way I learned and feel zero pain, but you can’t deny this classic!
0
matt-savvy
I figured since the article reads like someone who started using git after
swtichand friends were introduced.
Nope, started using git way before switch was added.
It’s not just that I think switch is unnecessary since you can do everything it does with checkout, it’s more that I usually see people who use switch have a mental model with big gaps around not only checking the repo at a specific commit or tag, but also checking out files (or parts of files!) from other branches, tags, or commits.
1
NobbZ
I am used to checkout and use it where necessary. Still I generally prefer switch for simply switching to other states of the repo.
It offers less surface for footguns, and by making --detach explicit, I know when I switch to a tag instead of a branch.
2
sodapopcan
jswanner
Gazler
Phoenix Core Team
I think the important thing when writing a commit message is to match the style of the project. Phoenix doesn’t use conventional commits, so when I’m contributing there, neither do I.
Personally, I prefer it when my commits aren’t squashed when contributing to any project, because I find it easier for bisecting, but again, a consistent format in the project is desirable, so if the maintainers decide they prefer squashing, I am happy to go with it.
4
mindok
I thought I’d pasted the image, but Safari pulled a swiftie on me and inserted a link - not sure why it wouldn’t show though. I repasted…
0
zachdaniel
Creator of Ash
I don’t squash well formed commit histories, but I do squash messy commits. I won’t waste time w/ OSS contributions asking people to fix their commits as you never know if they are coming back, so if it’s not up to snuff I squash it. But I think it is important to preserve the commits of those that took their time to make them good.
Ultimately I think any format that can make a commit log useful is a good idea, and conventional commits just happens to be the main one that I know of. But I’ve been thinking a lot about the #hashtag style that I mentioned above, or maybe a property list style, i.e
a nice message
type: fix
breaking_change: true
Lets you get the benefits of conventional commits but without the drawbacks people don’t like. Someone make a PR to git_ops please 
2
sodapopcan
Just to be clear since I’ve been pretty vocal in this thread, and I did already touch on this: I’m not only all for but greatly encourage local rebasing. Get git rebase -i main in your fingers. Same with git commit --amend --no-edit. I don’t like to drive-by ping people so I’ll say that (@)marcandre wrote the best blog post about this but it’s now gone so… I don’t know what you to tell you. Version control is an amazing development tool and I kinda wish that git proficiency had a bit more social/professional pressure behind it. Oddly, “vibe coding” is making a deeper understanding of git more valuable since agents can really heck up your code and, because speed is the name of the game, knowing how to quickly revert is essential.
0