

A Git Style Guide - pasxizeis
https://github.com/agis-/git-style-guide

======
davexunit
I'm very happy to see this guide encouraging the use of squashing and
rebasing. It's really frustrating to see patch sets being merged that look
like:

* Add widget

<code review happens>

* Fix typo

* Add test

* Fix test

* etc.

People fear rebasing because they already pushed to a remote server. Just
delete the remote branch and re-create it after you've rebased. Assuming, of
course, that this is a feature branch of some sort that no one else depends
on.

Clean, logical commits and a mostly linear history make me a happy developer.

------
hobarrera
A lot of these items seem to go against current standards for no particular
reason (or with no clear explanation). I've mentioned two here [1], but
there's several others.

[1]: [https://github.com/agis-/git-style-
guide/issues/4](https://github.com/agis-/git-style-guide/issues/4)

~~~
guiambros
Old, but still valid: [http://tbaggery.com/2008/04/19/a-note-about-git-commit-
messa...](http://tbaggery.com/2008/04/19/a-note-about-git-commit-
messages.html)

------
a3n
>Prefer dashes over underscores.

Why? Is this just an arbitrary style preference, or is there some practical
basis?

~~~
2bluesc
Alot of (Linux) package managers use dashes within package names and within
package versions and underscores to split name from version. This is the
convention I try to follow.

Example: package-name_1.0-rc1.pkg

