[lautis]

Numbers in commit messages don't really make any sense. I don't understand what value they might have. The narrative of your codebase is hard to follow when large number of your commits don't have any message explaining what you've done.

I like to commit (quite) frequently when working on something, but later I feel that work-in-progress commits are just hindrance. When looking at project history after two year, I'll be glad if there is a single, larger commit "implemented feature x". Rebase is your friend.

[akkartik]

"Numbers in commit messages don't really make any sense. I don't understand what value they might have."

I like to refer to 'commit 347' rather than 'commit a3bh'. There's an implicit sense of how old a commit is.

[Peaker]

Then if you later decide to shuffle the order of the commits, squash, or do other interesting things, you run into GWBASIC line numbering problems.

[akkartik]

I find I'm far less likely to need to insert commits than I was to insert lines in GWBASIC.