How I was taught: A branch for each feature. Each commit should be a logical segment of work, such that it tells a story of how the feature came to be from th

How I was taught: A branch for each feature. Each commit should be a logical segment of work, such that it tells a story of how the feature came to be from the different aspects of the system that needed to be modified. The branch will NOT be a history of how it was actually programmed. If master or another dependent branch changes, rebase the feature branch onto the dependent commits to keep merge conflicts under control as the branch is being developed. The branch will be rebased with commits squished and fixed as many times as needed (often 100's in a long running feature), with the end effect being such that the branch and commit history will look like divine providence. Took some hazing and months to learn but absolutely worth it IMO, and I can't go back now :)