1114
Rebase Supremacy (programming.dev)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 51 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I prefer to rebase as well. But when you're working with a team of amateurs who don't know how to use a VCS properly and never update their branc with the parent branch, you end up with lots of conflicts.

I find that for managing conflicts, rebase is very difficult as you have to resolve conflicts for every commit. You can either use rerere to repeat the conflict resolution automatically, or you can squash everything. But when you're dealing with a team of Git-illiterate developers (which is VERY often the case) you can either spend the time to educate them and still risk having problems because they don't give a shit, or you can just do a regular merge and go on with your life.

Those are my two cents, speaking from experience.

[-] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 9 points 6 months ago

How others are keeping their branches up to date is their problem. If you use Gitlab you can set up squash policy for merge requests. All the abomination they’ve caused in their branch will turn into one nice commit to the main branch.

[-] expr@programming.dev 8 points 6 months ago

I don't want squashed commits. It makes git tools worse (git bisect, git cherry-pick, etc.) and I work very hard to craft a meaningful set of commits for my work and I don't want to throw all of that away.

But yeah, I don't actually give a shit what they are doing on their branches. I regularly rebase onto master anyway.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
1114 points (98.1% liked)

Programmer Humor

19386 readers
343 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS