I think I would dislike that style as well. My goals in committing and editing history are, in order: 1. Is master always safe and deployable? 2. Does the hist

I think I would dislike that style as well. My goals in committing and editing history are, in order: 1. Is master always safe and deployable? 2. Does the history tell the logical story? 3. Does the history tell the physical story? That is, I prefer safety/deployability above all other considerations. Then I prefer a history that makes sense and can be comprehended. Then and only then do I care about the actual order and content of commits. Rebasing down to a single commit satisfies 1, but ignores 2 and 3. In my experience 1 and 2 go together very well.