> why does it matter that the git history is “clean”? Makes reviewing a set of changes prior to a merge much easier. It's nice if there's a 1:1 correlation bet

> why does it matter that the git history is “clean”? Makes reviewing a set of changes prior to a merge much easier. It's nice if there's a 1:1 correlation between a commit message and the actual patch contents. Im sure you've dealt with the case of reviewing a colleague's changes with a commit message like "Enable logging in foobar module" and the patch is actually enabling foobar logging and a bunch of other stuff. This makes bisecting your git history to identify and fix bugs much more difficult. If the git history is clean, you can just read the commit messages and implicitly trust the developer if clean git hygiene is in place (as opposed to actually needing to read the whole diff on a per-commit basis to find out what _actually_ happen at commit XYZ, despite it's message).