There are conventions; without going semantic versioning all the way:
50 chars max is considered good practice (yes that is extremely terse and I treat it as an ideal vs hard constraint)
A good commit fixes/adds one thing (and a good message concisely spells this out)
imho bothering to detail commits beyond the terse one liner often signals an issue with the commit itself (not always)
In a team environment:
Except under duress/time pressure will not skimp on the extra time needed to write a concise, informative commit message.
Will definitely review commits more carefully if a concise, informative message is not provided (and likely to ask for an updated diff)
Own work: will stop and ask myself what's going on when I err on the "improved a thing" side of things for any length of time as this could signal I'm losing focus or trying to muddle through/conflating separate issues.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
There are conventions; without going semantic versioning all the way:
In a team environment:
Own work: will stop and ask myself what's going on when I err on the "improved a thing" side of things for any length of time as this could signal I'm losing focus or trying to muddle through/conflating separate issues.