Veeeery abstract, amazing.
There is rarely a "why" provided because good branch names and commit comments are a persistent challenge. Abstract does nothing to help this.
I wonder if that's on Abstract or on the design team that lacks the organization/discipline to have a good naming convention for branches and commits?
I'm not an Abstract user, so I don't know what the commit message interface looks like, and how easily it can be neglected.
Are you an Abstract user? If so, what are your thoughts?
I'm an Abstract user on a team of 5 designers. Abstract simply asks for branch names or commit messages just like git does.
Naming conventions also exist in git, where they are also often ignored or very easy to deviate from without penalty. Documenting your work is a conscious effort and harder to stick to with aggressive deadlines and other "real" work looming. Anecdotally, humans don't seem skilled at describing or characterizing things. Our tools should help us be better. But they don't.
Abstract especially, unlike git, has almost no support for more granular commits (e.g. commits to some symbols but not others, these artboards but not those 3, etc.) leading to nearly useless commits like "cleanup" or "WIP" or "changes."
Abstract enables you to track the who, what, why, and when of every design decision...IF you're using Sketch. It even says on the website, "One place to version, manage, and collaborate on your Sketch files." If you're using Adobe XD, Affinity Designer or anything else really, you're on your own.
Like the way your site looks.