> I wonder what the creators of git think about your opinion on how to use it properly... Are you the creator of git? If not, how exactly are you qualified to

> I wonder what the creators of git think about your opinion on how to use it properly... Are you the creator of git? If not, how exactly are you qualified to judge "proper" usage -- by YOUR standard you're not qualified yourself, so...? (I realized it was a joke, but I offer the above as a counterpoint to the satirical/ironic element of the joke. My opinion is that the originator doesn't get special treatment. But then the point wasn't git, it was what/how things get merged into the Linux kernel. The mechanism is entirely immaterial.) Squashing commits for merge into Linux is not standard practice AFAIK... and happily I see an Linux committer has async'ly backed me up on this. Generally the preference I see, where git is concerned (not sure about the kernel), is that everything is rebased right into the master branch to avoid merge graphs getting absurd.