On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <[email protected]> wrote: > On 30 April 2013 15:57, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >> snip > > Of note against rebasing merges, is this: > http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2013/04/30/please-stay-away-from-rebase > > TL;DR rebase gives a linear history but the timestamps by default > remain the originals. i.e. your history now time travels as you follow > the pseudo linear history. > Well timestamp chronology isn't so important since git keep the commits in the order of the arriving. Imo removing the power of rebase is like using svn but with better merging possibilities.
Having the possibility to merge some commits from branches in one atomic commit is really good if you want to make sure that all commits pass the tests, while failures can be accepted in branches. Indeed in branches you can use commit as a way to show WIP, which should be unacceptable in master or productions branches. - benoit
