3 ms·
> For me, even though rebasing comes with some trappings, I still greatly prefer it to the alternative, which is to have merge commits cluttering up the commit
by throw555chip 3y ago
> For me, even though rebasing comes with some trappings, I still greatly prefer it to the alternative, which is to have merge commits cluttering up the commit history.
The purpose of history is to remember. Rewriting history, whether git or in life, is bad; outside of the context of don't use it on public repos. Such advice is similar to saying, only point the shotgun away from you when firing. If you have to remember such a rule, it's best to avoid it.
- 0x6c6f6c 3y agoBut in unmerged branches, you aren't rewriting history, you're starting your work on a more recent commit in history.
- ozim 3y agoShush, don’t say those things because maybe people discussing merge vs rebase will realize they don’t discuss but just talk side by side. One and the other does not care what is the context and what they discuss but apparently each one just knows better. I also don’t mean those specific users - but in general any git discussion I saw for last 10+ years.
- oehpr 3y agoA history you can't understand is a history you can't remember.