title: Naming convention for commits on a feature branch in Git Flow
body: <p>There is a point in the <a href="http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Git Flow model</a> that I don't quite get.</p>
  
  <p>Once work has been done on a certain feature branch <code>feature/foo</code>, and it is merged on <code>develop</code>, and <code>feature/foo</code> has been deleted, there is no further trace that the commits were done inside the <code>feature/foo</code> branch (see <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16403725/finishing-a-feature-branch-with-git-flow">this question</a>).</p>
  
  <p>Sometimes, however, it can be useful to keep track of this information, notably for traceability. Imagine that a branch was created following the opening of a ticket on an issue tracker. I would like to be able to see, preferably with <code>git log</code>, what work was done on this branch, even after it was deleted.</p>
  
  <p>Essentially, I am asking if it possible to obtain with <code>git log</code> the same kind of information that one can find on the <em>closed issues</em> page on a source-code sharing website, such as Github.</p>
  
  <p>It seems to me that without prefixing each commit message (either manually, or through a hook) by the name of the feature branch, there is no easy way.</p>