To rebase, or not to rebase - for me its not really a question. I
generally prefer a clean, linear commit history. Why? Because merge bubbles make
history confusing, noisy, and can break
Don’t believe me? Check out the pretty log to the right. See all those merge bubbles in there? Eww!
The workflow that caused those merges was as follows:
git pull(to bring local up to date)
git pull will fetch any new commits from the remote, and
then merge any local changes in, resulting in the merge bubbles.
A better approach
I typically use the same workflow as above with one tweak.
git pull I use
git pull --rebase.
--rebase option will fetch the remote commits and rebase your commits on top of the new commits from the remote.
This is the “re-writing” of history folks often talk about.
Make it better, automatically!
You can tell git to use rebase, rather than merge, in one of two ways, depending on your situation.
$ git config branch.autosetuprebase always # Force all new branches to automatically use rebase
You can add the
--global switch to have all future branches, in all
repositories on this machine, behave this way.
$ git config branch.*branch-name*.rebase true # Force existing branches to use rebase.
Get more info
Be sure to check out the git man pages for more info on what those options mean and when you may or may not want to use them.
You might also want to check out my Git Workflows repository
on The GitHubs where you can find a Keynote presentation (or PDF in the Downloads)
git rebase vs.
git merge Complete with