> It doesn't take a ton of time to reorder your commits, if you had some care for them in the first place.

THANK YOU for saying this. Reading through the discussion, it almost feels that people refuse to put like 3h over a weekend to actually learn git (a tool they use DAILY), and prefer instead to invent arguments why squash merging is so great.

> It doesn't make much sense to place failed attempts in a series of commits (and of their reverts), just go back to the last good commit if something was a dead end (and save the failed attempt in a branch/tag, if you want to keep it around).

I agree that failed attempts are bad to have as code history. If you reasonably split your commits, the commit message has ample space to document them: "Used approach X because... Didn't use approach Y because..."