{ "uuid": [ { "value": "079f2e09-0827-458e-91d3-6dd5b8b80c56" } ], "langcode": [ { "value": "en" } ], "type": [ { "target_id": "daily_email", "target_type": "node_type", "target_uuid": "8bde1f2f-eef9-4f2d-ae9c-96921f8193d7" } ], "revision_timestamp": [ { "value": "2025-05-11T09:00:12+00:00" } ], "revision_uid": [ { "target_type": "user", "target_uuid": "b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849" } ], "revision_log": [], "status": [ { "value": true } ], "uid": [ { "target_type": "user", "target_uuid": "b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849" } ], "title": [ { "value": "Should you include issue IDs in your commit messages?" } ], "created": [ { "value": "2024-05-15T00:00:00+00:00" } ], "changed": [ { "value": "2025-05-11T09:00:12+00:00" } ], "promote": [ { "value": false } ], "sticky": [ { "value": false } ], "default_langcode": [ { "value": true } ], "revision_translation_affected": [ { "value": true } ], "path": [ { "alias": "\/daily\/2024\/05\/15\/should-you-include-issue-ids-in-your-commit-messages", "langcode": "en" } ], "body": [ { "value": "\n

It's shown in the examples of the conventional commits specification<\/a> as part of the optional footer data.<\/p>\n\n

But is it useful?<\/p>\n\n

It can be if your issue tracker is linked to your Git repository and you can click the issue ID in a commit message and see the issue.<\/p>\n\n

But, how often do teams change issue-tracking software or the project is passed to a different company that uses a different issue tracker?<\/p>\n\n

That makes the issue IDs that reference the old IDs useless as no one has access to the issues it references.<\/p>\n\n

I'd recommend putting as much information in the commit message itself and not relying on it being in an external source, like an issue tracker.<\/p>\n\n

The Git log and commit messages will remain even if a different issue tracker is used, or a different team starts working on the project, and that additional information isn't lost.<\/p>\n\n

I'm not against putting the issue ID in the commit message but don't do it instead of writing a descriptive commit message.<\/p>\n\n ", "format": "full_html", "processed": "\n

It's shown in the examples of the conventional commits specification<\/a> as part of the optional footer data.<\/p>\n\n

But is it useful?<\/p>\n\n

It can be if your issue tracker is linked to your Git repository and you can click the issue ID in a commit message and see the issue.<\/p>\n\n

But, how often do teams change issue-tracking software or the project is passed to a different company that uses a different issue tracker?<\/p>\n\n

That makes the issue IDs that reference the old IDs useless as no one has access to the issues it references.<\/p>\n\n

I'd recommend putting as much information in the commit message itself and not relying on it being in an external source, like an issue tracker.<\/p>\n\n

The Git log and commit messages will remain even if a different issue tracker is used, or a different team starts working on the project, and that additional information isn't lost.<\/p>\n\n

I'm not against putting the issue ID in the commit message but don't do it instead of writing a descriptive commit message.<\/p>\n\n ", "summary": null } ] }