I'm reading a bunch of stuff lately about alternatives to the PR system, and altought I think some stuff there is really good, I have a felling that people fights a lot the "PR way".
Ex: people suffering cause they rebase from master on their branch. But why not just merge? "cause the PR is ugly" does it matter? as long as the diff is understandable who cares about the commits. then just "squash and merge" and everything is fine. your repo will very nice.
This doesn't mean that the PR system doesn't have issues. It has. The more PRs you produce and the slower they're reviewed, the more you suffer. No way of arguing against that.
No wonder you have problems if your repo looks like this. SQUASH AN MERGE!
"Thoughtless commits are bad commits" YES, TOTALLY AGREE. but those commits shouldn't make it into your master branch.
Good read https://jg.gg/2018/09/29/stacked-diffs-versus-pull-requests/amp/?__twitter_impression=true the case studies are great reflection of reality 😂
This is basically what the "stacked diff" approach does (but amending commits instead, which a lot of people also fights against).
I think that the "don't rewitte history" dogma hurts a lot. You should rewrite history IF it's your own history and is NOT shared yet.