I sometimes leave merged branches around for quite a while, because I squash them when I merge to master and sometimes when tracking down a bug the ability to bisect very handy.

▲

matijsvzuijlen 12 hours ago | parent [-]

What made you decide to squash when merging instead of leaving the commits in the history so you can always bisect?

	▲	quesera 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Not GP, but we do the same. Branches become the atomic unit of bisection in master, but the need is extremely rare. I think because we have good tests. We also keep merged branches around. This has never happened, but if we needed to bisect at the merged-branch level, we could do that. I know squash-merge isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I find it to be simpler and clearer for the 99+% case, and only slightly less convenient for the remainder.
	▲	dotancohen 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The range reason your history textbook is not infinitely long. The longer something is, the less digestible. When we need more granularity, it's there in the branches.