Soo, how long is "to much time" to think of a commit message?

"f-it" is a good one.
non detrministic ones are also good:
"probably fixed. maybe not"
when all else fails, you can use this xkcd for ideas:

"ISSUE-ISSUENUMBER fixed performance issues / implemented xy feature"

2.5 seconds haha

There is no "too much". Whatever it takes to write a comprehensible description, is the right time.

Usually it will take just a few seconds, but sometimes it takes a minute or two.

Write one with the description! I add "did this. Did that. Also did this and that." Title could be as basic as "commit message" 🥴🤭

Depends on the load of work and policy set around it.

If there is no policy, it can be like a second for stuff like `fixed/add/update x for issue x`

Some policy require detailed according to fix
`Add component x for x to support implementation of y. Removed dx to ensure meeting z and blah blah blah`
Also avoid huge commits, they make you think alot on what to write

I don't know about too much, but enough time is when you can figure out what you did and why, and can clearly convey it to others.

Long enough that it at the very bare minimum includes the issue number, but not too long that if Vim fails to save I’d be super annoyed.

I like to think of it was writing a message to yourself in the future that you can easily search for. So that’s I treat Git like my personal diary.

CRAP-1837 Dear Git,

Why does nobody like me? Also fixed that bug I introduced that broke everything lolz

If it’s taking too long to describe, split the commit into smaller easier-to-describe commits.

Just write what you have done, and why you have done it. Never commit a jira issue number and say fixed. Because some day you're gonna switch to another tool, and gone is your understanding of why something happened.

Commit something like: "Implemented caching for X, to reduce load in peak-production hours"

This way other developers (or yourself) can have a look I'm history why stuff has happened