Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

13
  • 34
    Unfortunately, the new Pragmstic Programming book is mostly written from using Git while still thinking in SVN, and in this case it has misled you. In Git, rebase keeps things simple when they can be. Your experience could tell you that your workflow doesn't work in Git, not that Git doesn't work.
    – Paul
    Commented Jan 20, 2009 at 1:23
  • 18
    I would not recommend squash merging in this case, as it saves no information about what is merged (just like svn, but no mergeinfo here).
    – Marius K
    Commented Jun 27, 2011 at 17:34
  • 7
    Love the note at the bottom, I had a similar experience of struggle with Git, but now struggle to imagine not using it. Thanks for the final explanation too, helped a lot with rebase understanding
    – Jon Phenow
    Commented Aug 11, 2011 at 15:13
  • 6
    After you have finish the feature, shouldn't you rebase one last time before you merge new_feature to master?
    – softarn
    Commented Nov 28, 2011 at 12:06
  • 17
    Your workflow loses all commit history from the deleted branch :(
    – Max Nanasy
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 21:05