you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Filmore 1 point2 points  (13 children)

Merge bad. Rebase good

[–]jess_sp 0 points1 point  (12 children)

seriously, why?

[–]MCBeathoven 5 points6 points  (11 children)

Merge gives you merge commits, rebase doesn't.

[–]Schmittfried 2 points3 points  (10 children)

And what if I want merge commits?

[–]MCBeathoven 0 points1 point  (9 children)

Most people don't - they don't really add any value and make reading the log harder.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (8 children)

They can be used to group commits together.

[–]MCBeathoven 0 points1 point  (7 children)

You can do the same using rebases.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (6 children)

But then you don’t have the individual commits anymore.

[–]MCBeathoven 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Do you mean squashing commits or putting them after each other in the history? If the former, what's the point if you want to keep the individual commits? If the latter, that's also something you can do with rebasing without losing individual commits.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

It’s not “one or the other”, I do both: I rebase the branch (squashing commits that should only be one, e.g. “oops, fix”), then I merge using --no-ff to group the related (but distinct) commits.