Hi Adam, In my opinion, the rule of one commit per PR was introduced to enhance the visibility of changes. However, in certain scenarios, it’s possible for a single developer and a test engineer to collaborate and submit their changes under a single PR. In such cases, I believe we should relax this rule and ensure that both parties receive the appropriate visibility and acknowledgment.
I’d love to hear the community thoughts on this. Regards, Adam > On Feb 2, 2026, at 7:36 PM, Adam Monsen <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm confused by https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-2462 . I > thought we generally aim for one commit per PR in the apache/fineract repo, > not one commit per person per PR. My suggestion is we stick with one commit > per PR, and I wanted to open this up for discussion here in case I'm missing > some change in convention or if there's something else I might learn. > > If you have thoughts on FINERACT-2462, please share. > > Wherever we end up, let's documented it somewhere useful, e.g.: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FINERACT/Submitting+a+Pull+Request > https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/.github/pull_request_template.md > https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md#merge-strategy > -- > > If the hope of preserving one commit per person per PR is to preserve credit, > I think that's not a valid justification. I do think it's a great idea to > credit more people other than the author and committer. In fact, many people > (and bots) often work on a single PR, e.g.: a committer, authors, project > managers, bots, designers, testers, and reviewers. I think a great place to > add credit is the commit log message. I would like to see more detailed > commit log messages anyway. We might add any number of trailers such as > "Reviewed by:", "AI Assisted by:", "Designed by:", "Scheduled by:", and > "Tested by:" per intended git commit trailer use > <https://git-scm.com/docs/git-commit#Documentation/git-commit.txt---trailertokenvalue>.
