It’s a good idea and a deserved momentary rub-in-the-face blog post title back then to call it “not rocket science” (not for a decade+ name though).

I don’t use this because we just use the standard forge stuff. But yes, there shouldn’t be a reason to “break the build” and for small teams you shouldn’t need advanced tech to solve the issue (like for a bigger team with a large test suite it is tricky).[1]

But it would also be nice with some nice, readable history at the top level. Doesn’t have to be “curated” but you could have highlighted quotes and whatnot... I don’t know. Look at the Git project; the merge commits are decent.[2] The Rust project’s merge commits look like some dogfood factory ground floor where the coolers have malfunctioned. Bunch of weird command-like `r? @ghost rollup=...` which look like they were vacuumed up from GitHub via contributors or maybe also Tina Fey-bot. Then the commit message will the ill-suited MarkDown dump from the PR, including paragraphs with no hard-wrapping,[3] inline links (you can use reference style but okay), or how about some crazy ascii tables that look like a MySQL console[4] when you query a table with 20 columns (exaggeration). But I guess this is the not-rocket-science aesthetic of real serious business going on here.[5]

[1]: Shouldn’t need to buy some company software like whoever is selling this via their history lesson

[2]: A typical one would be “the frobinator in the config parsing segfaulted ..., which has been corrected”. Then with an inline subject-only “log” of all the commits. Pretty old-school.

[3]: The stuff they put in the commit message even uses an arrow to indicate “oh this was too long for me”: `feels like a regression as →` https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/146121

[4]: 1ed3cd7030718935a5c5e5c8f6581f36d8be179f

[5]: Closer to the Linux Kernel style than the Git project, certainly