I'm not opposed to carefully crafting a good commit, I'm opposed to a state-heavy, badly named, inconsistent feature to do it. And if you use any decent git UI

I'm not opposed to carefully crafting a good commit, I'm opposed to a state-heavy, badly named, inconsistent feature to do it. And if you use any decent git UI (including -p on the CLI), you don't really need it to be that persistent very often. It could just be a list of chunks to select in the "make commit" window, which is of course exactly how most git UIs "make commit" window looks. It's a single step then, no intermediary persistent state (with three names). JJ seems to workaround this in the other direction, by making the concept of commits and rebases much more lightweight, which i think is a refreshing enough take that I'd like to try it.