![]() ![]() Might you want to revert the merge for any reason? In this case the branch itself doesn't convey any additional information (the commit already has the author). I've also worked on teams that used the branch-per-developer model (we've all been there). Rebase would destroy the branch and this would not be straightforward. Or diff a feature by comparing two branches (more common). For example, one can quickly revert a feature by reverting the merge of that branch (to be fair, this is a rare operation). Some teams use the branch-per-feature model where each branch represents a feature (or bugfix, or sub-feature, etc.) In this model the branch helps identify sets of related commits. Does the branch itself represent useful information In these teams I wouldn't risk recommending rebasing for any reason. Those developers don't know much about Git and don't want to know much. I've worked on teams where the developers all came from a time when companies could afford dedicated staff to deal with branching and merging. That means, if you do not apply it correctly, you could lose committed work and/or break the consistency of other developer's repositories. This is a good way to upset other developers quickly. Rebase destroys the branch and those developers will have broken/inconsistent repositories unless they use git pull -rebase. Is the branch you are getting changes from shared with other developers outside your team (e.g. There are a few factors you should consider when choosing which operation to use. So the short answer is to pick rebase or merge based on what you want your history to look like. Rebase will present conflicts one commit at a time where merge will present them all at once. Merge and rebase will handle conflicts differently.Merge will generally create an extra commit (e.g.The resulting tree structure of the history (generally only noticeable when looking at a commit graph) is different (one will have branches, the other won't).The only differences between a rebase and a merge are: the UI may show a "Merge" button by convention but the button can do any operations with any flags (keywords: merge, rebase, squash, fast-forward). Pull Requests: Popular git servers (Bitbucket, GitLab, GitHub, etc.) allow to configure how pull requests are merged on a per-repo basis. Squashing can be done as part of a merge or rebase operation (-squash flag), in which case it's often called a squash-merge or a squash-rebase. Commits can be combined into a single commits by squashing. ![]() Squashing: All commits are preserved in both cases (for example: "add feature", then "typo", then "oops typo again".). You probably want to pull and then rebase to base your changes from the current version from the repository. A second scenario would be if you started doing some development and then another developer made an unrelated change.When you want to bring those changes back to master, you probably want merge. Let's say you have created a branch for the purpose of developing a single feature.Rebase says I want the point at which I branched to move to a new starting point.Merge takes all the changes in one branch and merges them into another branch in one commit. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |