I've long been in the practice of "commit early, commit often". If one use case works I commit, if the unit tests pass I commit. The code may be a mess, the variables may have names like 'foo' and 'bar' but I commit to have a last known good state. If I start mass refactoring and break the unit tests, I can revert everything and start over.
I also push often because I'm forever aware disks can fail. I'm not leaving a day's worth of work on my local drive and hoping it's there the next morning.
I've become increasingly aware that my coworkers have nice clean commit histories. When I look at their PRs, there are 2-4 commits and each is a clean, completely functioning feature. No "fix misspellings and whitespace" comments.
I also push often because I'm forever aware disks can fail. I'm not leaving a day's worth of work on my local drive and hoping it's there the next morning.
I've become increasingly aware that my coworkers have nice clean commit histories. When I look at their PRs, there are 2-4 commits and each is a clean, completely functioning feature. No "fix misspellings and whitespace" comments.
What flow do you follow?