[Groxx]

Yeah, I do kinda like this setup too. You can have both readable (rewritten) history and structured sub-commits for "a change" rather than a totally flat stack. Plus I don't care about your local history, but I do care about the final history.

It's definitely how I prefer to review code (big changes broken up to isolated portions that are easier to validate, and the whole thing at once so you don't get lost in the trees), so it's how I would prefer to read it later too.

It does still have merge commits where stuff can hide though :/ and you've got to remember --first-parent :/ and all not-merge-focused things so have problems with it :/