git show --no-patch --format=%f [<commit>]
Ticket link should always be included in PR description.
But branch names should be descriptive like terraform_dev_create_instance
etc
  [feature/bug]/ISSUE-NUMBER-summary-of-issue
  bug/psi-456-broken-args-parsingWith GitHub setup properly, on PR open, it auto comments the link to the ticket and links to the pr in the ticket.
1) Cmd + shift + . -> Copy branch name
2) Build feature on that branch name
3) Build / Merge on Github and Linear closes the issue
If it has commits I care about, then it stays. If it doesn't, It goes. I'm only deleting on the server afterall, people can just push it back.
I also like it for myself, when I’m going over my own PRs before asking for a review - I will often amend commits to ensure the work is broken down correctly, each thing that should go together, does.
In a way, stacked PRs are just a higher-level abstraction of this too - same idea, keep work that goes together in the same place.
If you keep your PRs small I guess the end result is the same, but even then I like things in individual commits for ease of review.
Its not a if. it's necessary for the sake of people reviewing your code. Unless you work alone on your pet project and always push to master you never work alone.
You downvote me but you just agreed with me. When was the last time you read individual commits of a PR? If your PR need to keep the history of the commits that means that you should split your PR into smaller one.
This reaction tells me a lot about the state of our industry. (Or just the state of my mind.)
``` issues/{username}/{issue-number}-{description} ```
The username prefix is helpful, for both organization, and locating branches.
In my org it is common to use the JIRA ticket number in there somewhere but other than that I think you should leave it up to devs. I can't think of a reason why I would need to know the branch name.
My favorite branch name I created was for a JIRA ticket with the number 2468.
This became ab-2468-who-do-we-appreciate
Detailed branch naming conventions are just another piece of useless documentation for devs. And if you are using the branch name to tell you what is going on the you are misunderstanding the review process.
pat_erichsen•6h ago