"updates"

I had a commit recently that was like 2000 lines changed over 6 files. Really should have been a smaller issue.

Y tho??? Holy shit. Commits should be like functions. One thing and one thing only. Maybe a small group of files like the same change over multiple config files. 50 is insane to me.

git commit -m $(date)

You see, sometimes I code something, go to bed before finishing it, come back, decide not to commit because then I'd have to think of a commit message and I just want to code, start working on an unrelated feature, do that for a couple days, get distracted by life stuff and put the project down for a few weeks/months, rinse and repeat, and then I finally get around to writing a commit message because I'm about to start a huge change and I want a restore point and I'm like. Okay, it's been like 3 months since my last commit, I'm pretty sure my code can now do something it couldn't 3 months ago but come on, I can't even remember what I had for lunch last Thursday

I'm well aware this is terrible practice but I don't know how to stop doing it

"patch mode" - Patch mode allows you to stage parts of a changed file, instead of the entire file. This allows you to make concise, well-crafted commits that make for an easier to read history.

uuuuuuuu. and you could do -m to describe the commit.

next they'll add --push/-P.

perhaps add -r for fetch/rebase then commit.

one command to rule them all! 😈

I'm too lazy, I use -f

P1000x this.

I can read a diff.

I need to know why.

No, a code comment isn't good enough, it's out of date after the next commit.