[dimino]

I don't know about rebasing everything, but a commit is a changeset, and a changeset should always have a distinct and succinct purpose. There is no value added in having a single feature spread out over 5 commits.

When writing a feature, I use git to save my progress, and once I'm done, I would like to present the feature as a clear and complete changeset. A commit is me saying, "These are the changes I'd like to make to the codebase", and I feel that argument is easier to make when I present one thought, rather than the dozens of thoughts I had on the way.

If I were perfect, then I would commit in a way that was one cohesive thought, but I'm not. My commits are often, "Did the thing", then "redid the thing, with better testability", and "Re-redid the thing, fixing some fundamental bug in how I did the thing at first", etc.

[pawadu]

I really don't understand all the opposition ti this idea. This is exactly how git should be used, and it is how most successful large open source projects require you to work.