3 ms·
> You should use it the other way around Yes, that's how I thought it was meant to be used. (At first I got confused reading this article because I assumed th
by jmull 9y ago
> You should use it the other way around
Yes, that's how I thought it was meant to be used.
(At first I got confused reading this article because I assumed that's what they were talking about too.)
- nlawalker 9y agoNow I'm confused... is that not what the author is doing? >> the feature branch is reset to master, after which the commits are re-applied on top of feature Is that not rebasing 'feature' on top of 'master'?
- fredrikmorken 9y agoAuthor of the article here. Yes, this is what I am describing. Sir_Cmpwn is describing the same workflow as I am.