[dahart]

> I still advocate for cleaning up and squashing your own commit

Completely agree. And I suspect the increasing frequency of squash-merging is mainly to avoid having to do the work of cleaning up and commenting individual commits in a longer sequence.

I can see this both ways, it really is faster and easier to squash. And you’re right, it really does bury some context and functionally makes large changes harder to read or bisect or revert or modify.

One benefit to squash merging that you might have overlooked is that it can encourage frequent (and messy) committing, knowing that the churn will disappear without having to work hard to clean it up. This does, in a way, make the git workflow more appealing and easier to manage for more people.

[mrinterweb]

> One benefit to squash merging that you might have overlooked is that it can encourage frequent (and messy) committing, knowing that the churn will disappear without having to work hard to clean it up.

I've noticed the opposite. Developers who know all of their work will be smashed into one commit at the end tend to not commit as frequently, and the commits they do make are just checking in all of their work at intervals. It is more of a process of saving state. It doesn't matter how frequently they commit if all the commits will become one.