&gt; You lose a whole lot of development history information<p>What information do you lose, and why is that a problem? The feature commit tells you everything you need to know. Beneath those details tend to be irrelevant minutiae.<p>Let&#x27;s imagine an editor that made one commit for each key press you type, or every time you save a file. That would be the closest thing to true history. I might accuse your practice of not committing that level of detail with &quot;losing a whole lot of development history&quot;, and it would be true but only in a banal sense.<p>How an author built up their feature commit is almost never (and shouldn&#x27;t be) relevant to everyone else. What&#x27;s relevant to others is how they changed the repository and why. A good feature commit or commit series should stand alone.