[jmharvey]

I'm a fan of the workflow where the PR gets squashed in the upstream git repo, but the individual commits are preserved in the PR in the code review tool. I feel that Phabricator handles this well.

[usrusr]

But does that still lose the source commit long term? What I'd love to have is a mechanism that keeps references to the pre-squash commits at blame granularity, allowing one to dig deeper into the commit messages associated with a given line. Kind of like a sourcemap, but for squash instead of transpile.

[jacobegold]

You don't lose it long term if you're using GitHub PRs — GitHub keeps the "reflog" (quoted because I imagine their implementation may not actually use reflog) of the branch indefinitely, even after force pushes. Graphite (built to replicate the Phabricator workflow) enables viewing and diffing these versions. (disclaimer, I helped build this)

[91edec]

When you squash merge on github the new commit references the old PR. If you don't delete branches on merge you would keep the commit history on that branch, but then you have to battle with branchs persisting forever.

[easton]

GitHub and Azure DevOps also do that, you just need to know where to look.

I don’t mind squashing either, unless I’m being really intentional or rewriting my history my intermediate commits couldn’t be reverted without leaving stuff broken (totally a me problem of course).

[hamburglar]

Intermediate commits being snapshots of “broken” state isn’t a problem at all. When I quit for the day, I commit, broken or not, and pick it up in the morning. I want to be able to drop my laptop in a puddle and still pick up where I left off when I get a new one.