Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by BeetleB on Monday November 06, 2023 @03:56PM (#38168881)

As your parent already said, (and it matches my experience), we didn't have any of these problems when using systems without history rewriting (mercurial, for example).

I recall when I first switched to git at work and the team was insisting on a "linear history", I was bemused: Could these developers really not handle a merge graph? It was bizarre how something straightforward in other VCS is suddenly "messy" amongst git folks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by ajkjk on Monday November 06, 2023 @03:58PM (#38168912)

It's not that we/they 'can't' handle it. It's that we choose not to because it's a better life.

It is like moving to one's favorite part of town.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Julia Evans: Git rebase, what can go wrong by BeetleB on Monday November 06, 2023 @04:01PM (#38168942)

> It's not that we/they 'can't' handle it. It's that we choose not to because it's a better life.

As someone who has had to put up with rebase for several years now, my life is definitely not better. And things that were trivial in mercurial are now complicated (seeing the actual chronology - both in the log and in the graph). That graph with multiple branches that git developers find messy can actually be really useful.

[ Parent | on HN ]