I think the difference in my case is an atomic commit works in isolation and pass tests. The micro commits don't always do that. That's where I differ from the

I think the difference in my case is an atomic commit works in isolation and pass tests. The micro commits don't always do that. That's where I differ from the article author in my workflow. I have a "micro commit" sitting in a branch right now that's just a single line change, for example. That's not super common, but I don't have any strict rules for myself about when to or not to quicksave. > Have you considered advocating for a change of company standards? Oh trust me I did. I'm at a better job now :p My current company's git policy sounds identical to yours. But I still like this workflow for myself.