IME juniors struggle with making single commits in the first place. What I usually see is a scatter brained approach with more "fix" commits than anything else. This doesn't help with that, does it?
It means you can comment on the problematic commits saying "please squash this". Then (if it works as well as Gerrit) you can compare the commit between the before and after squash state.
Basically it lets you treat the commits as part of the thing you are reviewing instead of just a minor detail that the UI doesn't care about very much.
Comments
IME juniors struggle with making single commits in the first place. What I usually see is a scatter brained approach with more "fix" commits than anything else. This doesn't help with that, does it?
It means you can comment on the problematic commits saying "please squash this". Then (if it works as well as Gerrit) you can compare the commit between the before and after squash state.
Basically it lets you treat the commits as part of the thing you are reviewing instead of just a minor detail that the UI doesn't care about very much.
It could help in the sense that people would not accept a pile of `fix`, `fix of fix` commits in a PR anymore.
The current UIs don't punish you for that as the reviewer mostly sees one final coherent change.
I'm not aware of any PR/MR UI that hides the underlying commits. Some of us do look at them.
The Juniors are also very good with AI. Having them merge bad commits into logical ones is a fine operation for them too.