4 ms·
If you do this for short-lived feature branches only, why do you even need to squash merge for this? What I typically do for such things is to have a WIP commit
by w0utert 6y ago
If you do this for short-lived feature branches only, why do you even need to squash merge for this? What I typically do for such things is to have a WIP commit that I amend and force push while working on the feature, then when everything is ready to merge I reset —-soft and make separate commits for each part of the work that can be compiled and tested indivually, rebase onto master and then fast-forward merge.
- yawaramin 6y agoI think you just answered your own question. Compared to your workflow, the squash-merge workflow allows: - Commit and push naturally as you work - Reviewers to look at individual commits separately after having already reviewed previous commits - Squash-and-merge with one click (usually, e.g. GitHub) instead of messing around with git resets and branch history.