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

Why would I want to do that? Usually if there's a problem I'll either write a new test or see if someone modified a test I thought was covering the case

Usually people 'own' a file or part of the system so that wouldn't really be happening anyway



> Why would I want to do that?

Because sometimes we can learn from history. If a mistake was made at some point it can be good to understand why. Of course you can adopt the mindset that you don't care what ended up causing a bug, but learning from mistakes is a good thing.

> see if someone modified a test I thought was covering the case

How do you see if someone modified the test then? I feel like we are maybe misunderstanding eachother because to me, and seemingly most other commenter here, this is such an obvious no-brainer that it seems something is lost in the communication.


> Because sometimes we can learn from history. If a mistake was made at ...

A commit message helping me learn anything that I didn't get from a code comment sounds like a stretch. I'm doubting this

> How do you see if someone modified the test then? I feel like we are maybe misunderstanding eachother

Clearly. I was suggesting I might see commit messages if I'm using git blame to find out if a case was removed from a set of test or if it never existed in the first place. But I don't see how messages would help at all in anything I do. What I'm looking for is far too specific to be in a commit message and this whole thread about using commit messages to learn sounds nonsensical.


As I look at the top ten committers to our key service, two of us are still here, the other eight (including the lead from day one) switched teams or left the company over the last five years. Unfortunately I don’t think 27% turnover per year is unusually high in tech, so ownership isn’t a good replacement for written records.




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

Search: