[vezuchyy]

If you have a process where every commit is well documented, you don't need much comments since you can rely on whatever is your analogue for git blame. It's not a lack of comments, it's actually the opposite but aside from the code base.

When I worked at SAP where VCS for ABAP is ancient and has no analogue for git blame we had a practice of putting a SAP Note next to every code change, since some of the things that we had to implement are dictated by business/legislation, so you need a proper explanation from time to time. Without it, the code becomes unmaintainable.

[ShadowBanThis01]

That requires everyone to have access to the repo, and to wade through it looking for changes to the relevant area of code you're working in. That sucks.

[josephg]

Relying on commits also fails as soon as feature branches start being squashed. And the comments in commits can’t be modified over time. You have to hope readers “git blame” the correct lines of your code.

Just use comments.

[tormeh]

In which situation would you not have access to the repo? I guess if it's a library or something, but libraries must always be documented in a different way to business code.