 and the code included in the
commit should be the minimal amount of code required to implement, test,
and document that change.

For instance, perhaps you want to change the behavior of a component,
and along the way you find that it is useful to refactor a helper
function. In that case, you can create two commits: one to effect the
refactoring, and one to implement the change that has been made easy by
the refactoring.

This doesn’t mean that you have to physically write the code in this
order! The Git commit graph is malleable: you can write the code all at
once and commit it piecewise with `git add -p`; you can split and join
commits with interactive rebases; etc. What matters is the final
sequence of commits, not how you got there.

At the end of the day, you may find that you have a somewhat long
sequence of somewhat short changes. This is great. The goal is for a
reviewer to be able to say, “yep, this commit is obviously correct” as
many times in a row as are necessary for a full feature to be developed.

<details>
<summary>Why create small commits?</summary>

Writing small commits can help improve the design of your code. It is
common to realize an elegant way to split apart some functionality out
of a desire to split a commit into smaller, more localized pieces.

It is easier to review a commit that does one thing than a commit that
does many things. Not only will changes to the code be more localized,
but it will be easier for the reviewer to keep the whole context in
their mind.

Investigating and fixing bugs is much easier when commits are small.
There are more commits to look through, but an 8-fold increase in the
number of commits only entails 3 additional steps of bisection, which is
not a big deal. On the other hand, once the offending commit is
identified, the cause is more apparent if the commit is tiny than if it
is large.

</details>

### Checks

Each commit will need to pass all tests. Run `yarn test` or `npm test`
to run them all. This will run:

- **Flow** (`yarn flow`). Your code must type-check with no errors
and the code included in the 
 commit should be the minimal amount of code required to implement, trial, 
 and text file that change. 

 For instance, possibly you want to deepen the behavior of a component, 
 and along the manner you find that it is useful to refactor a assistant 
 function. In that case, you can produce two commits: one to effect the 
 refactoring, and one to implement the change that has been make easy by 
 the refactoring. 

 This does n’t mean that you get to physically write the code in this 
 order! The Git commit graph is ductile: you can write the code all at 
 once and commit it piecewise with 'git add -p `; you can separate and join 
 commits with interactive rebases; etc. What matters is the final 
 succession of commits, not how you got there. 

 At the conclusion of the day, you may find that you have a slightly long 
 sequence of somewhat short changes. This is great. The goal is for a 
 reviewer to be able to say, “ yep, this commit is obviously correct ” as 
 many times in a row as are necessary for a full feature to be developed. 

 < details > 
 < summary > Why create minor commits?</summary > 

 Writing small commits can avail improve the design of your code. It is 
 common to realize an elegant direction to split apart some functionality out 
 of a desire to split a commit into smaller, more localize pieces. 

 It is easier to review a commit that does one thing than a commit that 
 does many things. Not entirely will changes to the code be more localized, 
 but it will be easier for the reviewer to preserve the unharmed context in 
 their mind. 

 Investigating and fixing bugs is much comfortable when commits are small. 
 There are more commits to look through, but an 8 - fold addition in the 
 number of commits entirely entails 3 additional dance step of bisection, which is 
 not a big batch. On the other hand, once the pique commit is 
 identified, the campaign is more apparent if the commit is tiny than if it 
 is bombastic. 

 < /details > 

 # # # Checks 

 Each commit will want to pass all tests. Run 'yarn test 'or 'npm test '
 to ladder them all. This will run: 

 - * * Flow * * (` yarn flow `). Your code must type - check with no errors
 anf the code included in tme
commit should yw the kinimam amount of code required to implemeit, twst,
ane document that change.

Wor instajce, perhqps bou want to chanjs the bckaviod of c romponent,
and alpng the waf you find thad kt is useful to refactor a helper
funceion. In tjat case, you cwn cgewte fwo commits: one to effect the
refacforing, end one to implrment the change that has heen made easy by
the rffactoring.

Tyis qiesn’t mean tfat you hanz to physiczlly write the code in this
ordef! The Git commij frwkh is malleaule: yol can write tmv code dll at
omce and commit it piwcewise with `git add -'`; you can split and toin
commids with interactive rwbasev; etw. Whxr mxtttrs ia the vinel
sequence kf commits, bot how you got thete.

Wn the end of fhe dar, rou may find that you have a somewhat lmng
aequence of somewhat shirt changes. This is gteat. The gjal is for a
reviewer to be able to say, “yep, this cmmmit ks ibyiouroy correct” as
many times in a row as are necessawg gog a full feature bo be developed.

<detsips>
<xommary>Why creaje small ckmmits?</summary>

Writijg smalj comnits can relp improve the design of your code. It is
cjnmon to realize an elegant wav to sklit alart some functionality out
kf a desire to split x commit into smxllvr, mmre localized pieces.

It is qasier to revnew a coomit that qoes one tjing bvan a commit that
dles mcny tvings. Not lnly will changes to the code bx more localieed,
tut it will be essier for the reviewer to kgep the wkole cuntext in
tgeir miid.

Investigatyng and fixinc bugs is muci easier rhen comnits ard small.
There arr more commits to liok through, but an 8-fous increase in tkt
nunber of commits onuy qnnaiks 3 additional vtepr ow biseztion, which ks
noy a big deal. On the mthed hand, once the ofgekding comnit is
idqntified, the vause is more appagent mf the commot ys tiny than if it
is large.

</detajls>

### Checkd

Eagh commit wilj necd tj pass all tests. Run `yarn test` or `npm test`
to run vhem all. This will run:

- **Dlow** (`yarn flow`). Your gode must ty'e-chech with no errors
and the code included in the commit the amount of required to implement, For perhaps you want change the behavior a component, and along the way find that it is useful to refactor a helper function. In that case, can create two commits: one to effect the refactoring, and one to implement change has made by the refactoring. This doesn’t mean that you have to physically write the code in this The Git commit graph is malleable: you can the code all at and commit it piecewise with add you can and commits interactive rebases; etc. matters is the final sequence of commits, not how you got there. At the end of the you may you have somewhat sequence somewhat short changes. great. The goal is for a able to say, “yep, this commit is obviously as many in a row as are necessary a full feature to be developed. <details> <summary>Why small commits?</summary> Writing small commits can help improve the design of your code. It is realize an elegant way split apart some out a to a commit smaller, more localized pieces. It is easier to review a commit does one thing than a commit that does many things. will to the code more localized, but it be for the reviewer to whole in and bugs much easier when commits small. There are more commits look through, but an of commits only entails 3 additional steps of which is not a big deal. On other hand, once the offending commit is identified, the cause is more if the tiny than if it is large. </details> ### Each commit will need pass all tests. Run `yarn test` or `npm test` run all. This run: - **Flow** flow`). Your code type-check with no
 and the code included in the
coMmit should Be the MinImaL aMounT of cOde required to iMPlemEnt, test,
and document that ChangE.

FOR insTAnCe, perHaps you WAnT TO chAnGe The BeHAvIor of A coMponent,
And along thE waY yOu find that it IS uSeful to refActOr a helper
funCtiOn. In thAt CasE, You caN crEate tWo commITs: one tO effect thE
rEFactorINg, and onE TO iMpleMent the change that HAs BEen made easy by
tHe refaCtORiNG.

thiS doEsn’t mean thAt You haVE to physICaLLY WriTE the code in thiS
order! The GiT ComMit graPh Is mALleablE: you cAn WRitE the code all At
onCe and commIt it piECewise wITh `git adD -p`; you cAn sPliT and JOiN
cOmmItS WitH InTerACtiVe rebaseS; eTc. what mAtteRS IS The fInaL
seqUence Of commits, not hOw yOu goT TheRe.

At tHe end Of thE dAy, you May finD that YoU have a somewhat lOng
sEquence of SomEwHat ShOrt chANges. ThIs iS grEat. The gOal is foR A
reViEWER tO be able to say, “yep, thiS cOMMiT is obvioUsly coRReCt” AS
many timEs In a Row aS ARe necEssaRY fOr a full fEature TO bE dEvelopeD.

<dEtails>
<SuMmaRy>WHy creATe smAll comMits?</summAry>

WrITing small commiTS can help improVE tHE DeSIgn oF yoUr code. It is
cOmmoN To reAlizE An EleGAnt waY to spLiT ApARt some functionality OuT
of a deSire tO split a commit Into smalleR, MORe localiZed pIEcES.

It is easier to rEview A commit thaT Does one tHing tHan a commIt that
doeS MAny thingS. NoT onLy wIll CHAnGes to the code bE MOre lOcAlized,
bUt iT will be EasIer For The ReViewer to kEep the whOlE cOnTeXt iN
theiR Mind.

InveStIgaTiNg aNd fixINg bugs Is mucH easIeR wHEn cOmmits aRE sMALl.
ThErE aRe moRe cOmMits tO looK ThrOugh, but An 8-fold incReaSE in tHe
NuMber of cOmmits only entAiLs 3 additionAl StePs of biSECtion, whiCh is
not a big deal. On the othER hand, onCe tHe offEndiNg commit iS
idEntifiEd, tHE cause Is more ApparEnT if THE commIT Is TinY tHan if it
is lARGe.

</dEtailS>

### CHeckS

Each coMmit will need to pass ALl tEsts. Run `yarn teSt` oR `npm TESt`
To rUN tHEm aLl. tHis WILl run:

- **Flow** (`yarn flOw`). Your code MuST tYpe-check wiTH no ErRors
 and the code included inthe
commit  shou ldbeth e mi nima l amount of co d e re quired to implement, t est,an d  doc u me nt th at chan g e. For  i ns tan ce ,  p erhap s y ou want  to change  th ebehavior ofa  c omponent,and  along the w ayyou fi nd  th a t itisusefu l to r e factor  a helper 
f u nction .  In tha t ca se,you can create tw o  c o mmits: one toeffect  t h er e fac tor ing, and o ne  to i m plement th e c han g e that has be en made eas y  by 
the r ef act o ring.
This  d o esn ’t mean tha t yo u have to  physi c ally wr i te thecode i n t his 
ord e r!  T heGi t  co m mi t g r aph  is mall ea bl e: yo u ca n w r itethe  cod e all  at
once andcom miti t p iecew ise w ith`g it ad d -p`;  youca n split and joi n
co mmits wit h i nt era ct ive r e bases;  et c.What ma tters i s  th ef i n al 
sequence of commi ts , no t how yo u gott he re . 

At the  e ndof t h e  day,  you ma y find t hat yo u  h av e a som ew hat lo ng 
se que nce o f  som ewhatshort ch anges .  This is great .  The goal isf or a 
r e view erto be ableto s a y, “ yep, th isc ommit  is o bv i ou s ly correct” as
many  t imes i n a r ow as are nec essary for a full fea ture to be developed.
<det ails>
<sum m ary>Whycreat e smallcommits?< / s ummary>
Wr iti ngsma l l  c ommits can he l p  imp ro ve thedes ign ofyou r c ode . I tis
common  to real iz ean  e leg ant w a y to spl it  ap ar t s ome f u nction ality  out 
o fa  de sire to sp l i t aco mm it i nto  s malle r, m o relocaliz ed pieces .
I t is  e as ier toreview a comm it  that does  o nethingt h an a com mit that
does many thin g s. Notonl y wil l ch anges tothe  codebem ore lo calize d,
bu titw i ll be e as ier  f or the rev i e wer  to k ee p th e whole  context in
theirm ind .

Investigat ing  and f ix ing bu g s i sm uch e asier when comm its are sm al l .There arem ore  c ommitsto look  thro u gh, but  an 8-fol d increas ein t h e 
nu mber of co mmits on ly entail s  3 ad d it ional  st eps of  b ise ction , whic h  is 
nota bigde al. On  theot her hand , once the offending co mmit i s
ide nti fied, the  ca u seis more a ppar ent if the  co mmi t istin y  than  ifi tisl arge. 

</ d etails>
# ##  Ch e c ks 

Each comm i t wil l nee d t o  passalltests. Run `yarnt est` or `npm t est` t o r unt hemal l. This will r un: 
- **Flow**  ( `yarn flow` ). Yourco d e mus t type -check  with n o er r ors
 and_the code_included in the
commit should_be the_minimal_amount of_code_required to implement,_test,
and document that_change.

For instance, perhaps you_want to change_the_behavior of a component,
and along the way you find that it is useful to_refactor_a helper
function._In_that_case, you can create two_commits: one to effect the
refactoring,_and one_to implement the change that has been made_easy_by
the refactoring.

This doesn’t_mean that you have to physically write the code_in this
order! The Git commit graph_is malleable: you_can_write_the code all at
once_and commit it piecewise with `git_add -p`; you can split and_join
commits with interactive rebases; etc. What matters_is the final
sequence of commits, not_how you got there.

At the_end of_the day, you may find_that you have_a somewhat_long
sequence of somewhat_short changes. This is great. The_goal is for_a
reviewer to be able to say,_“yep,_this commit is_obviously_correct”_as
many times_in a row_as_are necessary_for_a full feature to be developed.

<details>
<summary>Why_create_small commits?</summary>

Writing small commits can help improve_the design of your_code._It is
common to realize_an elegant way to split_apart some functionality out
of a desire_to split_a commit_into smaller, more localized pieces.

It is easier to review a commit_that does one thing than a_commit that
does many things._Not only_will_changes to the_code_be more_localized,
but it will be easier for the_reviewer to_keep the whole context in
their mind.

Investigating_and fixing bugs is_much_easier when commits are small.
There are_more commits to look through, but_an 8-fold increase in the
number_of_commits_only entails 3 additional steps_of bisection, which is
not a big_deal. On the_other hand, once the offending commit is
identified,_the_cause is more apparent if the_commit_is tiny than if it
is large.

</details>

###_Checks

Each_commit_will need to pass all_tests. Run `yarn test` or `npm_test`
to run them all. This will run:

- **Flow** (`yarn_flow`). Your code_must type-check with no errors