3 ms·

It's not destroyed, it's simply not on master. If you want to push that branch and have the history forever, that is an option.

• hinkley 11y ago
  Anything not stored on the system of record cannot be counted on to exist at any point in the future. From a strategic standpoint, thinking of that data as anything other than 'destroyed' would be a grave error of judgement. From a retention standpoint the difference between 'could' and 'did' is profound.
  • jasonlotito 11y ago
    > Anything not stored on the system of record cannot be counted on to exist at any point in the future. That's an issue with GitHub itself, not an issue with the method of squashing commits before merging into master. See gerrit as a prime example of separating reviewing code and your master branch.
  • cdcarter 11y ago
    If you have an issue with people deleting branches that were intentionally preserved to save history that was then squashed onto master, that's not the fault of anyone who squashed their commits but left them preserved on a branch.