xsevensinzx (9/13/2016)
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (9/13/2016)
You could do this in a header, but there's no enforcement. People make changes to procs, test them, make more changes, test, fix things, test, and by then they may not update the header. A checkin to a VCS, requiring a comment, is a good way to try and force someone to write a comment at the time the code is working, and it's being checked in. Not at the first attempt to change.
Jira, PM, any system can work, but none of them connect to the time when a change is actually completed in code.
If you're not enforcing proper code standards and styles then you are not committing your code correctly either. Committing in this context means not properly committing your code to SQL Server without the proper documentation, not just the VC.
If you can enforce people to commit and use VC, you should be forcing them to comment and document too. VC usage or not, everyone should be documenting inside their code under the same guidelines and enforcement.
But yeah, I get that a commit message means it's done. If someone completes a task in JIRA. Why would it not be done? Do you frequently run into cases when someone was not done? That they lied to you? 😛
This was baked into our (non-date) developer review criteria years ago, so when it was mandated that all data changes had to use VCS - it automagically was incorporated into the data dev profile as well. They weren't happy that they lost their access past dev, but that feeling passes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?