> it's a lot easier to review a pull request when history is unedited.
Ist it really? If you would See my uncleaned history, it would take you days to understand what I was even trying to do.
Your statement seems based on the assumption that someone knows how to achieve a particular thing right from the start. But that isn't always the case and there might be a lot of different approaches until the correct or best one is found.
Do you really want to review dead code that's somewhere in the commits of a feature branch?
Yes, I'd much rather review a PR with the full unedited history, not the history that the submitter thinks is good or pretty. You often don't know what information you need until you need it. I'll take the entire, dirty history, and once I'm done with it it can be squashed.
Ist it really? If you would See my uncleaned history, it would take you days to understand what I was even trying to do.
Your statement seems based on the assumption that someone knows how to achieve a particular thing right from the start. But that isn't always the case and there might be a lot of different approaches until the correct or best one is found.
Do you really want to review dead code that's somewhere in the commits of a feature branch?