[lolinder]

Can you provide more details of what you're referring to? I understand the importance of an auditable trunk/production branch, but I'm having a hard time imagining why the sequence of commits on feature branches would matter in an audit.

The commit history is not an audit log, it's very easy to make it look like whatever you want it to look like, even if rebasing as such is banned. I have a hard time picturing a scenario where the commit history is trusted as an audit trail and it matters that every detail is present.

[peteradio]

I'm referring to an outside certified audit of your code. You can make it look worse for yourself with rebases/squash merges but assuming you are working legitimately those would tend to obscure your work in realtime. What you as a developer would want is to be able to mirror your code changes along with the change requests.