Git best practices
by Don Mahurin, 2022
Source control is a crucial tool for engineers, enabling them to track, isolate, and release software. Every engineer should understand the importance of source control and how to use it properly. Unfortunately, engineers ( and managers, architects ... ) are sometimes lacking essential knowledge of source control.
This lack of knowledge can lead to wasted time, incomplete documentation, lost information, and a lack of accountability. By understanding the importance of source control and how to use it effectively, engineers can improve the quality and maintainability of their code and avoid common pitfalls.
The Purpose of Source Control
Source control serves several important purposes in software development:
Documentation: Source control comments and scope rationale provide valuable documentation for software development. This documentation can help developers understand why certain changes were made and can also aid in troubleshooting.
Versioning: Source control allows developers to indicate specific revisions for release or checkpointing. This can help developers go to known versions of software and help ensure that the intended version of the software is being used.
Traceability: Source control provides traceability, allowing developers to understand who or where software changes originate. This information is important for explanation and can also be necessary for legal or compliance reasons.
Essential git commands
As a prerequisite to a discussion of git best practices, we need to go over some basic git commands.
How to pull
The general syntax of git pull is easy. We specify the remote repo and branch. If we do not specify, the current remote and branch are used.
git pull [remote] [branch]
But often we would like to specify different local and remote branches.
And usually we should use --rebase to ensure that the local branch is in sync with the remote side (more or why this is preferred later).
git pull --rebase <remote> <remote_branch>:<local_branch>
How to push
Pushing with git is similar to pull, we can also specify the remote repo and branch to push to.
git push [remote] [branch]
The local and remote branch can also be specified. Though note that they are reversed from what they are with pull.
git push <remote> <local_branch>:<remote_branch>
How to change commits
Before a commit is pushed to a shared repository, you can (and should) modify commits to clarify the intent of the commit.
To modify the commit message:
git commit --amend
To add or modify a file in the current commit
git commit --amend file
To take a file out of the current commit:
git reset HEAD^ -- file git commit --amend
Guidelines for good commits
Now we have some basic commands covered. Let us refine our commits.
Guidelines for Meaningful Commits in Source Control
In order to create and maintain individual meaning for commits in source control, it is recommended to follow ACID-like transaction properties:
Atomic: Each commit should be independent and self-contained. It should be possible to apply the changes in the commit without relying on changes from other commits.
Consistent: Commits should follow consistent conventions for commit messages and comments. This makes it easier for other developers to understand the changes and their purpose.
Isolated: Commits should have a limited scope of change. They should be focused on a single task or issue and not include unrelated changes. Commits should also separate functional changes (changes to code or behavior) from non-functional changes (such as changes to file names, indentation, or formatting).
Durable: Commits and their associated comments should persist intact over time. This ensures that the meaning of the commit is clear and understandable even in the future.
By following these guidelines, developers can create meaningful and understandable commits that improve the traceability and maintainability of the source code.
Guidelines for Writing Meaningful Commit Messages
Commits serve as important documentation for software development, so it's important to provide clear and concise explanations of the changes being made. A meaningful commit message should include the following information:
Who: Identify whether the change originated from you or someone else. If changes were made by multiple authors, they should be separated.
What: Clearly document what is being changed. The output of 'git show' should match the files changed and the commit message.
When: Ensure that the commit date is accurate to the change.
Why: Explain the reason for the change, including any issue tracking IDs. This can help other developers understand the context of the change and the problem that it's intended to solve.
Any imported changes should be kept separate, perhaps in a separate repository, and follow similar conventions to document the origin, date, and purpose..
By following these guidelines, developers can write more effective and understandable commit messages that improve the documentation, traceability, and maintainability of the software code.
More essential commands
Let us build on our basic use of git, and give a few more necessary git commands
Amending an earlier commit
We previously went over how to change the current commit, but sometimes we need to change an earlier commit.
git rebase -i revision^
In the interactive editor, mark the commit as “edit” then modify with the commands discussed for changing the current commit.
Sometimes for clarity or to follow guidelines, we would like to combine commits. We do this by using “squash”
Git rebase -i revision^
Then we mark commits to be combined (with the previous commit), with “squash”
When we squash, we should remember to make commits more meaningful according to our stated guidelines.
Good squash usage (atomic, simplified result)
Here, the spelling fix is combined with the change that introduced it, and the premature extra field code is completely removed
Less good squash usage (non-atomic, unsimplified result)
Here, unrelated changes are merged together, and the commit message no longer matches the change
As previously mentioned, when we pull, we should usually use --rebase.
We do this because:
To synchronize our changes with the upstream repository.
Tends to encourage commits to be more atomic and portable
Forces commits to be merged individually, rather than in bulk
If we do not rebase and we merge instead, we can cause the following issues:
Combined individual commits may not be equivalent to merge result
Tracking changes to individual commits may become difficult or impossible
History becomes cluttered with merge commits
History is more difficult to follow as it is no longer linear
Branches are useful to allow us to separate independent development - Though, we should strive to have a minimal number of branches. Fewer branches means less duplication of effort.
Here, the simplest approach is the best.
Use a single main branch (master/main)
All other branches (testing, feature, release, next), should branch/re-branch from the main branch
This follows the general git flow conventions of GIT (man gitworkflows), Gihub workflow, Gitlab workflow, the Linux kernel.
Note, that this does not include a ‘develop’branch. Of course, you should create temporary feature/development branches as needed, and use meaningful names. But having a persistent “develop”branch (the nvie strategy), unnecessarily adds a second main branch, and more work. My observation is that the nvie strategy devolves into ‘develop’being the main branch.
Large projects are often composed of many repositories.
There are a few common ways to combine repos for your project. Some good. Some less good.
git submodule (recommended) - external repo’s are configured and specific revisions to use are tracked in the main repo.
Recommend using “pure virtual”modeled main repo, where the repo only contains repo references, and no other files
Recommend using “update --remote”as a normal case. This exposes issues more rapidly.
With the conventions above, git submodule can behave similarly to the Google “repo”tool.
repo (tool from Google) (recommended) - repositories and revisions are specified in a XML manifest file, which itself can (and should) be tracked in its own repository.
git subtree - changes from other repo’s are imported into the main repo as a directory, and may be synchronized indirectly using git subtree
“Mono-repo” (not recommended) - Only one repo - used to avoid complexity of properly syncing repos of a large project, but in doing so, breaks fundamental collaborative and decentralized nature of git. Syncing with upstream projects becomes nearly impossible, without additional tools. Additional tools would basically be reinventing ‘git subtree’ This is a case of the invention of tools due to not understanding existing tools.
Other important git tools
Some other important git tools to understand, that we did not cover
git cherry-pick - pull in changes from other branches
git stash - set aside (but keep) current modifications
git revert - note, this does not remove a commit, it just creates a revert commit to reverse the change
git mergetool/difftool - use a graphical tool to merge conflicts or compare
git blame - find who made specific changes in a file
git bisect - find when an issue was introduced by using this binary search mechanism
git filter-branch/filter-repo - mass changes of a repo (advanced)
git lfs - essential to allow large files to be stored efficiently in git