> A better question is: why does git only have one gesture for it, when devs clearly use it to mean different things already? Do they, though? I mean, most use

> A better question is: why does git only have one gesture for it, when devs clearly use it to mean different things already? Do they, though? I mean, most users simply use a GUI layer on top of Git, and thus often are oblivious to what Git is doing under the hood. > All of the squash vs. no squash debate, which may or may not influence the way you use `git commit`, is a workaround - that we've forgotten is a workaround - for the fact that Git has only one way to say it. No, not really. At best it's a debate over which branching strategy a team wants to standardize over. I happen to be working in a team which after months of doing non-ff merges of PRs it's starting to favor squash merges, and there is absolutely no discussion over the topic. Everything boiled down to "the history looks noisy, let's squash to remove noise as GitHub still tracks feature branches", followed by "sure, why not? If this doesn't work out we can fall back to non-ff". Done.