Looking at the Cesium network, it shows branches exactly the way Git treats them, basically as pointers into head nodes of the graph:
Looking back farther in the past, the lines intertwine and mix a little, and it’s not always clear which changes ended up in which branches if they’re old. Also, often branches are merged into master and then the branch label is gone but an anonymous line of changes remains.
What do you guys think of the idea of starting each commit message with the name of the branch being committed to? Excluding auto-messages like merge of course, and excluding master.
So, if I make a change on the Sandcastle branch, the commit message will be something like “Sandcastle - Added cool new feature xyz.”
Actually I’ve been doing this for a while now on that branch, and I’m curious if it’s something the group thinks we should all adopt as part of coding standards, or if it’s not needed.