This opinion is wrong and person should feel bad.

Did some more work to fix up his previous, unfinished work, and did git commit --amend (good, we don’t like dozens of commit messages like “oops I forgot this bit”, and squashing at the end is more complicated).

Can't tell if joke. Doesn't seem to be. New branch and push amend, drop old branch, solved. The complaints seem to be, "I don't want to understand git's rigid workflow, instead I want it to intuit what I want. Just overwrite my shit without asking! It's more convenient that way!"

Who the hell wants presumption in their source control? I want that behavior as rigid as law.

Remote is truth. Remote is immutable.

Also, are they legitimately complaining that they don't want small commits? Small commits are best practice because they create granular and traceable history.

This person needs to:

1. Stop expecting a tool to adapt to every user's presumptive flow, and instead adapt to the tool.
2. Define a commit workflow that resolves granular commits into sensical messages.
3. Don't use force args on remote unless you're the admin and know the potential consequences, ya muppet.

All this effort to avoid learning and conforming to the standard workflow. Seriously one of the worst opinions I've ever seen. Congrats.

I think the source of this person's struggle is their own misguided opinions. If they paused and thought, "Why does git do X that way..?", it would become clear. But who has time for that. Thrash and shout.

TLDR: If git solution is so bad, solve it better.