I find it better to have more commits for git-bisect.
Then it ends up being a specific incorrect refactor, which can be made an example of, by adding regression tests, mentioning it in team guidelines, adding lints etc.
When you want to revert the whole merge, you can still use a UI button or git revert -m 1 <merge-commit>.
As for full diffs, it's just as easy to diff two arbitrary points as the state before and after a single commit.
I just don't think it brings anything useful to the table.
Maybe it's appropriate to squash-merge to the release(not master) branch in a non-CD situation. Not sure.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I find it better to have more commits for
git-bisect.Then it ends up being a specific incorrect refactor, which can be made an example of, by adding regression tests, mentioning it in team guidelines, adding lints etc.
When you want to revert the whole merge, you can still use a UI button or
git revert -m 1 <merge-commit>.As for full diffs, it's just as easy to diff two arbitrary points as the state before and after a single commit.
I just don't think it brings anything useful to the table.
Maybe it's appropriate to squash-merge to the
release(notmaster) branch in a non-CD situation. Not sure.