top | item 33652507

(no title)

yuhc | 3 years ago

No. A diff is a commit.

discuss

order

KronisLV|3 years ago

> At Meta we call an individual set of changes made to the codebase a “diff.”

I don't work at Meta and I still don't have any idea which of you is right.

A commit would satisfy the description above.

As would a pull/merge request, which the image in the article perhaps fits better: https://engineering.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Code-R...

Of course, it's possible to review each individual commit as well, but who does that?

I know that some folks love to mess around as much as they need in their local branches, commit often and then do an interactive rebase, to maybe end up with one or just a few commits that can then be the basis for a pull/merge request, then the difference matter a little bit less.

yuhc|3 years ago

> At Meta we call an individual set of changes made to the codebase a “diff.”

This statement is definitely a misleading one. A diff itself is always a commit in the history log, and a diff can't be a group of multiple smaller units unless their team submit change set to git first and sync the squashed commit back to fbcode. But even in that case, from fbcode's view the squashed commit is still a diff.

A set of changes is called diff stack.

zeckalpha|3 years ago

They might get squashed for review or before merge, making the distinction less important. When you are running a monorepo you generally don't get long series of small commits in a batch but rather a singular atomic commit.

sancho_panza|3 years ago

At first glance, I thought you said “comment” instead of “commit”. I laughed at the facetiousness