4 ms·
Sounds like you were bit by rebasing, rather than by git itself. Yes, the API is large and complex. But git itself is easy to learn, and extremely powerful. Wh
by SeoxyS 12y ago
Sounds like you were bit by rebasing, rather than by git itself.
Yes, the API is large and complex. But git itself is easy to learn, and extremely powerful. Whatever situation you might have gotten yourself into, git probably has a good way to handle it.
There's one rule I abide by, which makes my git usage sane: no rebasing. Everything stays in the history, and there's no reason to squash commits into one giant context-less commit.
The only common case in which rebasing is valuable is in getting rid of meaningless commits constantly merging the latest master into a feature branch.
- cozuya 12y agoI don't get the "rebasing sucks" argument about why git is bad, at all. Most professional arenas will have a source control best practices document, how hard is it to say "no rebasing allowed"? Just because a feature exists does not mean it has to be used or even should ever be used.
- jackweirdy 12y agoI follow your rule, but with a slight tweak - only rebase on non-master branches, and before having pushed. After that it's out the window