>> hierarchical commits, so I could add bits to a commit without having to squash/amend. > Branch merge commits are already this, kind of. However their UI suc

>> hierarchical commits, so I could add bits to a commit without having to squash/amend. > Branch merge commits are already this, kind of. However their UI sucks and there's an idea gap which prevents them from being fully understood as such "supercommits" composed of subcommits. Isn't that "idea gap" mainly the fault of all these weird newfangled git workflows that discourage or outright forbid branching? If you have no branches to merge, you can't have a merge commit to act as a "supercommit". Call your "supercommit" a "feature", and what you need to implement it is... A feature branch.