@glcst Is there also exit tax when you move between provinces?

@glcst LOL. I learned something today. Thanks @glcst

@Michael_Ludden @ClerkDev Congrats Michael!

@dahankzter @glcst Sweden has exit tax too so does Poland

@AvgDatabaseCEO Ha ha. I love your comment :)

@notrab Congrats @notrab !!!

@penberg Don't merge any if Nix is not a standard tool used by the project :)

@isburmistrov @penberg Yes. This is the same in terms of splitting the work. Whether you keep multiple commits per PR or do 1 commit per PR, what matters most is that you have those commits separated.

Or maybe we just need better rebasing tools to make it easier to split changes into better commits. Can AI help? 🤔

@souper_deluxe @penberg When I developed @Android and @googlechrome, history was extremely valuable. With avg turnover at Google being ~2 years, good history is all we have :)

@ospfranco Yeah. I think stacked PRs are a good solution, assuming each PR is as small as possible - within reason.

@isburmistrov @penberg This is a problem. One can make sure every commit compiles and passes tests without CI, but it's obviously more work. While lack of tooling support is an important argument, it does not change the fact that long-term codebase with good commits is better off.

@isburmistrov @penberg I can't disagree with that :). If you can do PRs which are of the size of a single well defined commit then it's perfect. The result is the same as bigger PR with good commits but is integrated sooner and more often which is great.

@isburmistrov @penberg Git is just a tool. One can split work into good commits without using git rebase. It's just more work :)

@isburmistrov @penberg I don't think this is a good parallel. Vim benefits only the writer and only at edition time. Good commits benefit the whole team at read time and debug time.

@isburmistrov @penberg In my experience, well separated commits are worth the work. Bisect is such a useful tool, and it's much more useful when commits are not huge. It is also much easier for me to review a change that's well laid out and not a big blob of loosely related modifications.

@DomainerRyan @raphael_scarv @penberg Does it work well for people who work with you and have to review your code? :)

@isburmistrov @penberg What I meant was the work it takes to keep the commits tidy. Git rebase -i just happens to be the most popular tool to achieve it. Sorry for not being clear. My understanding is that squashing is just easier and less work than keeping the commits well separated.