Hacker News Reader

to me this appears to be trading off a valid change log for neat naming ... i dont see why rewriting history is ever a good idea

I find it quite hard to follow PRs when there is a lot of rebasing. I don't really find separate non-time-based commits useful.

So I agree but unfortunately it's the norm and policy for some clients.

Git-absord by default doesn't squash the fixups though, it creates new ones with special tags for easy rebasing later.