3 ms·
Indeed when you do work on a feature branch, you shouldn't rebase. But when you're working on master, or a branch that's also remote, then you have to rebase.
by eloisant 14y ago
Indeed when you do work on a feature branch, you shouldn't rebase.
But when you're working on master, or a branch that's also remote, then you have to rebase. If you don't then you get completely meaningless merge commits. If 3 people merge when they just want to push a commit it then you're history becomes a tangled unusable mess.
- justin_vanw 14y agoMaybe you are history becomes a tangled unusable mess, but it works for me just fine.
- Cthulhu_ 14y agoThen those three should've worked on their own feature branch. In fact, one could consider a local copy of master (or, commits made on master on one user's machine) as a feature branch, all named 'master'. Another thing, a developer doesn't need to obsessively pull every couple of minutes. If they're fixing a bug and deciding against using a branch for that (seeing that it could be just one commit), they only pull twice; once before they start working, and again when they're done and want to push to master. If there's more than one person fixing the same bug simultaneously, then it's yet another process bug.