Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by phinullfermata on Monday November 06, 2023 @12:40PM (#38165811)

Uising squah merges has reduced my need to rebase a lot. I don't really care if I have merge commits on a feature branch for a PR if there's a reasonable history on the main branch when I'm troubleshooting an issue with git blame.

Why squash merges? I have a number of team-mates who make local commits on feature branches that make the history look like a series of less-than-useful commit messages. E.g. wip, wip, wip, wip, make it work, wip, wip. All of the context for the change is actually on the PR, so it's really only helpful to see the PR message and have a link to the PR for the discussion on the change.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by mvdtnz on Monday November 06, 2023 @01:08PM (#38166256)

Squash merges are rebases.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by phinullfermata on Monday November 06, 2023 @01:46PM (#38166896)

Maybe under the hood, but it's an option on github if you use that, or you can run `git merge --squash` as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]