3 ms·
You can merge with master instead of rebasing, the downside is you'll end up with a lot of merge commits in a long living branch. I just rebase and force push.
by doix 4y ago
You can merge with master instead of rebasing, the downside is you'll end up with a lot of merge commits in a long living branch.
I just rebase and force push. I really don't get all the people that say avoid doing that. If you're the only one working on that branch, there's no risk.
If you're working with other people on the branch, and no one has unpushed changes, it's also fine. Everyone will just need to reset to the origin version of the branch to keep working.
If people do have unpushed changes and you force push, then they need to spend some time untangling it. Which is annoying, but it's not the end of the world. I don't get all the fear about it.
Don't rebase and force push master, that'll piss everyone off, sure. But doing it in branches is fine in most cases.
- rc00 4y ago> If people do have unpushed changes and you force push, then they need to spend some time untangling it. This is where `git pull --rebase` could save you all some time. You can even modify your git configs if this happens enough.