I've never worked with a group that tested each of their rebased commits, and the rebase workflow definitely doesn't make that the default. It's possible, the o

I've never worked with a group that tested each of their rebased commits, and the rebase workflow definitely doesn't make that the default. It's possible, the options are there in the flow, but they're inconvenient and out of the way, and as a result, people don't use them in my experience. > Not to imply I accept the "corrupt database" opinion, but I think it's worth saying that aside from the collaborative element of VCS, commits exist for the purpose of exploring past code changes. A practice which improves that seems sound to me. I dispute that rebasing improves exploring history. It makes the history linear at the cost of making intermediate commits untrustworthy. Both techniques require some manual discipline, and I'd feel differently if in practice people generally would lint and test each commit every time they rebased. If you do, then I've got no quarrel with ya.