Should I use rebase or merge?
For individuals, rebasing makes a lot of sense.
If you want to see the history completely same as it happened, you should use merge.
Merge preserves history whereas rebase rewrites it .
Rebasing is better to streamline a complex history, you are able to change the commit history by interactive rebase..
Why Git rebase is bad?
If you do get conflicts during rebasing however, Git will pause on the conflicting commit, allowing you to fix the conflict before proceeding. Solving conflicts in the middle of rebasing a long chain of commits is often confusing, hard to get right, and another source of potential errors.
Should you use git rebase?
In summary, when looking to incorporate changes from one Git branch into another: Use merge in cases where you want a set of commits to be clearly grouped together in history. Use rebase when you want to keep a linear commit history. DON’T use rebase on a public/shared branch.
When should you avoid rebasing a branch?
1 Answer. Case 1: We should not do Rebase on branch that is public, i.e. if you are not alone working on that branch and branch exists locally as well as remotely rebasing is not a good choice on such branches and it can cause bubble commits.
How do I stop git rebase?
You can run git rebase –abort to completely undo the rebase. Git will return you to your branch’s state as it was before git rebase was called. You can run git rebase –skip to completely skip the commit. That means that none of the changes introduced by the problematic commit will be included.
Is it better to rebase or merge?
Merging is a safe option that preserves the entire history of your repository, while rebasing creates a linear history by moving your feature branch onto the tip of master .