←back to thread

Git CLI tool for intelligently creating branch names

(github.com)
35 points Terretta | 2 comments | 31 Oct 25 13:37 UTC | HN request time: 0.015s | source
Show context
r1cka ◴[31 Oct 25 14:56 UTC] No.45772653[source]▶
I think people worry too much about branch names. Feature branches are usually ephemeral. Prefix your branch with your personal identifier so I know who is primary on it and worry more about the commit message which will live on indefinitely.
replies(5): >>45772677 #>>45773377 #>>45773466 #>>45774133 #>>45774578 #
morkalork ◴[31 Oct 25 14:57 UTC] No.45772677[source]▶
Yes, please just name the branch after the ticket/issue number so we can all get the context for it and call it a day
replies(3): >>45772963 #>>45773320 #>>45784312 #
wara23arish ◴[31 Oct 25 15:15 UTC] No.45772963[source]▶
I hate issue numbers for branch names. ISSUE-9482 doesn’t really provide much.

Ticket link should always be included in PR description.

But branch names should be descriptive like terraform_dev_create_instance

etc

replies(3): >>45773128 #>>45773171 #>>45784316 #
6LLvveMx2koXfwn ◴[31 Oct 25 15:27 UTC] No.45773128[source]▶
we do:

  [feature/bug]/ISSUE-NUMBER-summary-of-issue
e.g.:

  bug/psi-456-broken-args-parsing
replies(2): >>45773179 #>>45784322 #
darkwater ◴[31 Oct 25 15:30 UTC] No.45773179[source]▶
More or less the same here, but we (I?) prefix it with the username as well, so when pulling branches you know who created it.
replies(3): >>45773812 #>>45774594 #>>45784353 #
1. celticninja ◴[31 Oct 25 16:22 UTC] No.45773812[source]▶
But the PR and git blame can tell you this so I would never look at the Branch name to find out this information
replies(1): >>45775078 #
2. darkwater ◴[31 Oct 25 18:23 UTC] No.45775078[source]▶
For me is useful when I run 'git fetch' from the command line. I don't use any graphical git client