vidimitrov

5 ms·

1.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
"Expertise" is a completely different beast from "knowledge". Expecting to gain it from a model only through prompting is similar to expecting to become capable of something only because you bought a book on the topic.
2.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
That’s cool. But how does it work in agentic environment? Do you get any benefit from it? Or it’s intended only for humans to read?
3.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
The “deterministic enforcement” is exactly what this enables but its not the responsibility of the spec to say that. Its harnesses or IDEs or you own implementation that will enforce that.
4.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
Issue trackers are full of intent and decisions, that's true, but that's not the point here... It's about a storage that agents can use natively without the need of callings external APIs or MCPs. And there is a slight differ
5.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
This looks very good. Thanks for sharing. I can only imagine how much discipline it takes to write these kinds of commits manually.
6.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
The format is optimised for agent querying and human readability in `git log`, not for `git interpret-trailers` compatibility. Those are different use cases.
7.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
Trailers were not suitable for the use case. The scope in parentheses is doing real work. `rejected(oauth-library)` lets you do `git log --grep="rejected(auth"` to find every rejected auth decision across history. If you flatten i
8.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
The problem is that usually we don't write the WHY in the commits... We tend to always capture the WHAT in the form of prose. And for agents, this is just more noise, since all they need is just the diff to reconstruct the WHAT. I&#x27
9.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
A few examples are the ability to query historical data and using each action line as a signal for other tooling to build on top but there are many others… you can check what Conventional Commits did in the past and what they unlocked only
10.
Contextual commits – An open standard for capturing the why in Git history(vidimitrov.substack.com)
37 points by vidimitrov 6mo ago|38 comments
11.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
That’s exactly the direction I went with. Working on a spec for exactly this - planning to post it here soon: https://github.com/berserkdisruptors/contextual-commits
12.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
Nope - though I’ll take it as a compliment either way. It’s a problem I’ve been sitting with for a while, so the answer came out more formed than I expected. You disagree?
13.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
He admits the real hole himself: "this doesn't catch spec misunderstandings. If your spec was wrong to begin with, the checks will pass." But there's a second problem underneath that one. Acceptance criteria are ephemera
14.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
Level 4 is where I see the most interesting design decisions get made, and also where most practitioners take a shortcut that compounds badly later. When the author talks about "codifying" lessons, the instinct for most people is
15.
by vidimitrov 6mo ago
* * *