this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
26 points (100.0% liked)
Git
2886 readers
18 users here now
Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency.
Resources
Rules
- Follow programming.dev rules
- Be excellent to each other, no hostility towards users for any reason
- No spam of tools/companies/advertisements. It’s OK to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the community should not be self-promotion.
Git Logo by Jason Long is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's correct that
rebase
rewrites history, but it's important to identify when it's not acceptable. If you are working on a branch that is shared by others (typicallymain
), you should never userebase
. But it's an acceptable practice when used properly. I userebase
on my feature branches whenever necessary. If it fell behind themain
branch I dogit fetch
followed bygit rebase origin/main
, resolve the merge conflicts and keep coding. I also use interactiverebase
when I need to tidy things up before merging the feature branch tomain
.That’s what I do as well. Where I work, it’s common to have branches that take long to be ready for merge (because of bureaucracy), but because of many teams working on the same app, the upstream branch changes quite often.
I see some coworkers make just a few changes and a lot of times reverting stuff so the diff might be 1 line in the end, but the commit history is a mess of 30 commits of merges, triggering pipelines and undone stuff that was discarded later.
Then sometimes they have to find where they changed something they broke their feature and it’s a hell time to find what commit actually has any relevance for the final result.
Rebasing is fine for any unpushed commits including ones on shared branches.