Jujutsu is perfect for that - you create new changeset upfront, providing message at the same time (which can be later amended as needed). Feels so much more logical to declare the topic first, rather than come back to some accidentally uncommitted changes and wonder what was doing there.
replyExactly! For anyone interested, I guess the previous comment refers to the Squash Workflow, which happens to be very idiomatic in Jujutsu
replyhttps://arialdo.codeberg.page/ju-ju-tsu/tutorial/moving/squa...
"Topic" is usually covered by branch name. Commit message goes with a set of code changes, it feels more logical to me for the message to describe the actual code as it was written (as it might have changed from the idea phase).
replyIn Git, but workflows in Jujutsu aren't necessarily the same as in Git.
replyBranches for example aren't named in Jujutsu. You can bookmark them which gives them a name in some sense... but that's an optional thing you can do, often as a concession to centralized Git interoperability.
So in this case the parent to your post isn't thinking about it wrong given the context and such workflows have their advantages I've found.
Also branch names are extremely limited in what they can describe.
replyYou can start to write the commit message first in Git too. (And I do that.)
replyAgreed. You can preplan a bunch of small steps and then fill in changes.
replyOn hindsight that should be obvious! Pre-write your commit message, because of course you know what you are going to work on!
replyBDD. Absolutely changed my world
replyAs in gherkin/cucumber? Or more generally?
reply(the language... I, for the love of it, can't remember which is which)