In terms of the git notification emails, merge or rebase, doesn't matter. Each commit that is being merged in in the case of a merge, or reapplied in the case of a rebase, will be sent as a notification. So we lose either way. Woot.
In the case of rebase vs merge in terms of workflow, merge drops all commits that are coming in from a branch as a single diff and applies them in one go to the top of the branch you are merging into. Handling conflicts at this point can be overwhelming if you are dealing with conflicts from potentially multiple commits. With rebase, you are essentially "grafting" your branch to the end of the branch you are rebasing. Each of your branch's commits are reapplied one at a time to the end of the rebase branch. If a conflict happens at any point during application of your branch's commits, one at a time, the rebase stops, and you have to resolve the conflicts. This can be easier in the sense that you have to just deal with one commit's changes at a time. The downside is if your branch has diverged drastically, you will probably be dealing with these conflicts on every commit, which can be time consuming and long. My go-to is usually rebase, as I have a better idea of how my changes modify the codebase. That said, there are times to use merge as well. On 4/3/13 1:40 PM, "Lorin Beer" <lorin.beer....@gmail.com> wrote: >hmm, I was under the impression that rebasing was more dangerous, I'll >reassess my workflow. > >Sorry for the trouble Max! > > > >On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >Merges are dangerous in that sense. Rebase when you can! > >On 4/3/13 11:59 AM, "Max Woghiren" <m...@google.com> wrote: > >>Just wanted to quickly chime in here‹Lorin, your sizeable merge reverted >>one of my bug fixes (CB-2732). Not a huge deal, and a re-fix is on the >>way, but try to be extra careful when doing merges like that. :) >> >> >>On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> >>wrote: >> >>> Sounds good. Cool graph Jesse! >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Lorin Beer <lorin.beer....@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > hmm, likely a merge. A local commit before pulling in upstream >>>changes, >>> > then doing a merge seems to be the cause. >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> >>>wrote: >>> > >>> >> merging most likely, set up a filter. >>> >> I commit to master, checkout 2.6.x, pull master, push 2.6.x because >>>I >>> >> want all the work I am doing in 2.6.0 >>> >> >>> >> https://github.com/purplecabbage/cordova-wp8/network >>> >> Looks good to me ... >>> >> >>> >> @purplecabbage >>> >> risingj.com <http://risingj.com> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org >>> >wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> There's quite a bit of email spam from both of you and I wasn't >>>sure >>> >>> what caused it? Do you know? >>> >>> >>> >>> rebasing? merging? branching? >>> >>> >>> >>> Hard to figure out what actually has changed when these happen, so >>>I'd >>> >>> like to figure out what causes them. I did one recently where I >>> rebased a >>> >>> remote feature branch. >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> > > > > > > > >
