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

Tickets can also be some documentation about why some code is why it is. Put the ticket number in your commit message and use git blame when you want to understand something better. By fixing code without tickets you make this impossible for future developers.


Yes tracability etc... but to be honest: For such a trivial thing, this thing called commit message right before or after the ticket reference can do the job as well with one less indirection ;)


This is any-benefit thinking.

There is some tiny marginal benefit to what you’re talking about (there’s a chance someone might later want to look at the corresponding issue). But you aren’t acknowledging the cost, measured in my sanity making a bunch of one-line issues in jira, and the team’s time doing cost estimation.

It’s nice to leave breadcrumbs for future code historians. But our job is shipping product. Cost estimation, jira, etc all only have value proportional to how much they help us ship. If the meetings are pointless, and jira isn’t needed then doing that anyway is a waste of time.


“Link to a ticket system” is generally awful advice.

- Why the commit was made should be in the commit message

- What the change is inherently lives in the diff

- Why the code is how it is should be in comments adjacent to the relevant code item.


To be fair if the fixes are trivial they shouldn't need any extra context from a ticket to understand




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: