heisenberg302

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by heisenberg302 3y ago

   Responses would make more sense if people included: - if they have done any cherry-picking - if they have done any backporting - if they have reverted any commit that made it to main - if they have ever used bi-sect I think rebase is harder
2. 2.▲
   by heisenberg302 3y ago

   also you can use git rerere if you need multiple goes for the rebase, it saves your conflict resolutions and applies them automatically when they occur again(you need to resolve the conflict when it happens for the first time).
3. 3.▲
   by heisenberg302 3y ago

   I prefer rebase over merge because when merging since the commits are added to HEAD, when I add new commits after merge, I find it harder to understand what is being added with the current pull request. One thing that annoys people when reb
4. 4.▲
   by heisenberg302 3y ago

   Another thing is if you keep commits in a clean "state", it is easier to revert a commit, when you squash or keep them messy it can make it harder to revert. Also sometimes you decide you want to backport some change to other rele
5. 5.▲
   by heisenberg302 3y ago

   I had an account in Wise, and I was transferring money between my accounts (all the names were same). Everything was legal but they closed my account and started replying to my emails with huge delays. I provided all the supportive document