It's self-reinforcing. If commit history is reasonably clean, the barrier to doing code archeology is lower, so you reach for it more often. And if you do code archeology often, you develop a better sense of what's a clean commit history and what makes commit messages useful.
The need for code archeology depends on a project. When you writing a lot of new code it's probably less important than in a legacy thing where most changes are convoluted tweaks made for non-obvious reasons.
Postgres (which is a wrapper around tokio-postgres, and as a result drags the whole tokio bloated dependency graph). I would love to have a purely sync alternative to that.
A generalist, programming since ~2000 (professionally since 2008).
Some areas I can help with:
* math
* advanced algorithms
* interfacing with experts in other technical fields
* prototyping
* figuring out minimalist solutions
* performance optimization
* Rust, vanilla TypeScript, Python, C++
* DevEx
The need for code archeology depends on a project. When you writing a lot of new code it's probably less important than in a legacy thing where most changes are convoluted tweaks made for non-obvious reasons.