I think that's exactly it, a 'straightforward rename' shouldn't consist of 20 commits with crap messages including 'missed that' (+ merge commit).
But tonnes of people don't care about git hygiene or using tools well in general, GP's in for an exhausting time caring about it much in projects they're not in control of.
I mean, I guess? Some people like small commits, and most of them looked reasonable to me (renaming one thing at a time); criticizing commit style seems like bike-shedding, anyways.
Agree. I guess it’s different styles but when reviewing code I’ll look at the whole PR and almost never go commit by commit. If you expect OSS contributors to have perfect git hygiene, your project will never get contributors. If a breaking change is introduced, revert the offending PR as a whole.
Commit messages like "more", "rollback", "missed that" are not really what you expect from such an organization, so, yeah, that should've been squashed with a descriptive and useful commit message. My repos look like this but… I'm not a professional developer.
> were too lazy or hostile to negotiate a deal with Hashicorp
And how do you know about any dealings any of us did or didn't have with them, now or in the past? Are you privy to any of that?
> lack of competency in execution, planning, strategy, and software engineering
One of my old bosses taught me a lesson. Any time you criticize something, you spend your capital. This capital is earned by building value, by being constructive. If you have any constructive feedback, now is the time to speak up or remain silent forever.
