3 ms·
long ago scott chacon said he didn’t use rebase and so i never learned how. i don’t feel that my commit history has suffered as a result.
by hprotagonist 5y ago
long ago scott chacon said he didn’t use rebase and so i never learned how.
i don’t feel that my commit history has suffered as a result.
- umvi 5y agoThat's like saying "Long ago X said he didn't eat cruise ship buffet food, so I never do that either when I'm on a cruise. I don't feel my cruise ship experience has suffered as a result" It begs the question - how do you know it wouldn't improve your experience if you've never tried it?
- hprotagonist 5y agofair enough. ironically, i read “A supposedly fun thing I’ll never do again“ and subsequently resolved to never go on a cruise, either…
- mikepurvis 5y agoLike everything else in git, rebase feels like bits of seemingly-unrelated functionality bolted together, but I think I find basically all of the parts useful: - Rebasing my local changes onto remote updates has always felt safer and more natural than creating merge commits containing actual diffs. - The ability to trivially patch, drop, combine, and reorder commits has always felt like a superpower when it comes to telling the "story" of a change in a review, or breaking up a review into multiple smaller ones. - It's a bit more roundabout compared to just "edit", but if I want to amend a commit that isn't the HEAD, I often find it easier to just make a new commit with the desired change and then use rebase -i to move it up and squash it into where it needs to go.