I'm assuming the commits in the repo were generated with the tool itself. In that case, commit `cc677f7` has a (in my opinion) terrible commit message. It starts out with a listing of stuff I could just as well read from the patch. It then contains another list that tries to explain the why, but it ends up being useless fluff like `The full path specification in `go build` was redundant given the context of how Go modules are structured.` and `streamlining the project structure and reducing unnecessary directory complexity.` which tells me exactly nothing about why those changes were made.

It generates a whole lot of text that makes me none the wiser as to why you wanted to do any of those changes. It feels like a robot trying to justify the changes post hoc. Which it of course is, so that's understandable.

Don't take this comment as rudeness BTW. It's cool that you're making a fun little tool. I'm assuming you care about writing more useful commit messages, so I thought I'd give you some feedback on that part.

▲

Aplikethewatch 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah totally see where you're coming from, i seemed to have been slightly lazy with that commit... However, the tool does ensure that the dev has the final say; it will open the user's editor with the commit message that the ai has 'drafted' so the dev can make necessary changes - it provides a starting point that a dev can then tailor.

▲

nicoburns 11 hours ago | parent [-]

> However, the tool does ensure that the dev has the final say; it will open the user's editor with the commit message that the ai has 'drafted' so the dev can make necessary changes - it provides a starting point that a dev can then tailor.

The problem with this is that it still biases people towards including useless fluff. I'd almost rather have no commit mesasge whatsoever (so I at least know there's nothing of value there) rather than having to read through paragraphs of text to determine that there was nothing useful to read. I'd much rather have a terse one line sumamry that includes the gist of the intent of the change than a bunch of waffle.

(I'd rather have 1-2 paragraphs of a well-written, accurate description of the content than any of that, but AI unfortunately isn't capable of that).

	▲	crabmusket 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The problem with this is that it still biases people towards including useless fluff. The developer now has to choose "do I spend the time to make this commit message better?" or just skim it and say "yeah that's good enough."