Hacker News Reader

TIL

It's really not. Anything the LLM can benefit from people can too. Keeping minimal explicit information in git history is a cultural norm not proven best practice. The best codebases I've worked on have very large commit messages and searching them is very useful. We should have been doing it that way all along.

> This way I can keep git clean and easy to understand for humans

Personally I like it best when both humans and agents find it clean and easy to understand, but we all like different things :)

Branches and worktrees exist and can effectively act as a "separate" history. At the end of the day you would still merge the changes in, possibly with a squash if you don't care about the little commits.