this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
1113 points (98.1% liked)

Programmer Humor

19564 readers
557 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago (27 children)

I know this is a meme post, but can someone succinctly explain rebase vs merge?

I am an amateur trying to learn my tool.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 7 months ago (18 children)

Merge keeps the original timeline. Your commits go in along with anything else that happened relative to the branch you based your work off (probably main). This generates a merge commit.

Rebase will replay all the commits that happened while you were doing your work before your commits happen, and then put yours at the HEAD, so that they are the most recent commits. You have to mitigate any conflicts that impact the same files as these commits are replayed, if any conflicts arise. These are resolved the same way any merge conflict is. There is no frivolous merge commit in this scenario.

TlDR; End result, everything that happened to the branch minus your work, happens. Then your stuff happens after. Much tidy and clean.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (17 children)

Thanks for the explanation. It makes sense. To my untrained eyes, it feels like both merge and rebase have their use. I will try to keep that in mind.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Never use rebase for any branch that has left your machine (been pushed) and which another entity may have a local copy of (especially if that entity may have committed edits to it).

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)