3 ms·

I tend to squash at the point that the PR is merged in so that the incremental commits themselves can be referenced on the PR historically, but mainline stays c

by fire 5y ago

I tend to squash at the point that the PR is merged in so that the incremental commits themselves can be referenced on the PR historically, but mainline stays clean with a single squashed commit added per PR. I've tried to do squashing into intermediate branches before, but in those cases I'm not a fan of the enormous commit message I need to make when squashing the combined feature into mainline in order to keep things clear to contributors on what it actually adds

jasonpeacock 5y ago
> I'm not a fan of the enormous commit message I need to make when squashing the combined feature into mainline Agreed. I keep each feature/significant change in its own branch/PR as a single commit, and just create more branches/PRs for each separate commit. Sometimes my features require multiple commits over time to deliver, they each get their own branch/PR and those commits are preserved in mainline.