I guess this question has no correct answer, but I'd still appreciate any feedback.
I'm currently trying to find my personal preferred git style. There are a few things I'm sure about:
When I'm done with a topic branch and about to merge it back into master, I see two options: Just merge it. Or use
git rebase --interactive to squash all commits I did into one, and than merge that.
The plain merge has the advantage that a lot of small commits are easier to merge (or so I've been told). Plus it's easier to revert/bisect later. The disadvantage is a lot of clutter in the history /
If I squash all of my commits into one, I can avoid that clutter (and one can write beautiful commit messages after an
rebase --interactive). But than this single big commit might be hard to merge. And a lot of fine grained information is lost.
So, can you offer any insights on this question? (hm, and maybe I should post this on some git list or on stackoverflow.com...)