[digisign]

Not in gitlab at least. Click on squash and you see nothing but the total of the branch difference, the merge req title, and a few lines of boilerplate it adds.

About as easy as it gets. As titles are issue numbers changes are documented automatically.

[ninkendo]

I don’t want anybody to be able to see my WIP commits, even if it’s easy for them not to see them.

Yes, that probably is a “me” problem, and I’m too anxious about it for no reason, but that’s me. But if you saw my local scratch branches you’d probably understand.

(My wip commits occasionally bitch about coworkers, for example. Or they just contain a bit too much profanity for a professional environment. Or there’s just 50 worthless “WIP” commits with no other description. You’d never know any of this from my PRs.)

[digisign]

Recording sensitive information then relying on your perfect performance to remove it is flawed opsec. Not to mention a waste of time, as our great ancestor mentions.

[ninkendo]

It’s not a career ending thing if somebody saw my commit history. It’s just mildly embarrassing. It’s not a waste of time either… time spent crafting a final commit from the whole change, writing a descriptive commit message, and documenting everything well helps people review it, and that’s time well spent.

[digisign]

Ok, that's one strategy. However, we put that information in our issue tracker, docs, and source code comments, where more people can reach them more easily. Commit msg is PROJ-1234, which gets automatically gets linked to issue with design and comment history and project/product folks can contribute.

[ninkendo]

I’m lost. What are you arguing at this point?

[digisign]

The ancestor stated, all this futzing with commit history is a waste of time. I tend to agree.