fredrikmorken

Author of the article here. You are absolutely right, and many of the other comments here suggest that people are struggling with problems that stem from the fact that their branches are long-lived.

I would encourage everyone to consider adopting trunk based development (https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com/). I expect this to solve many of the problems people have. Using short-lived feature branches that are merged every day, merges are trivial, and history easy to read. A rebase-based workflow wouldn't be that harmful if you use short-lived branches either, although the argument for preserving history still stands.

Author of the article here. Yes, this is what I am describing. Sir_Cmpwn is describing the same workflow as I am.

Author of the article here. You bring up some interesting points, and I would not be much opposed to the workflow you describe. However, as others mention, if the problem results from a combination of changes, I would expect the merge commit to be the one that contains the error. Moving this errror to a commit that was originally part of a branch without errors is just confusing to me.