+1 for rebase which keeps commit history. Xiaoyu
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 10:55 PM Ayush Saxena <[email protected]> wrote: > Unless the effort is very high > +1 for rebase > > -Ayush > > > On 16-Aug-2021, at 8:30 PM, Shashikant Banerjee > > <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > +1 for rebase > > > > Thanks > > Shashi > > > >> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 2:10 PM Hui Fei <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks for bringing this up. > >> > >> Share an article for introducing Rebase: > >> https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Rebasing. > >> There is a sentence "to tell the story in the way that’s best for future > >> readers" in this article and it makes sense. > >> > >> "Merge" is more friendly for branch developers, and "Rebase" is more > >> friendly for future developers. > >> > >> From the whole project angle, +1 on Rebase. Cleaner history, easier > trouble > >> shooting and faster development. > >> > >> Tsz Wo Sze <[email protected]> 于2021年8月12日周四 上午9:55写道： > >> > >>> Hi Ozone dev, > >>> > >>> We should discuss whether we want to do "merge" or "rebase" for > >>> the HDDS-4454 branch. This a standard git question: > >>> > >>> > >> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/804115/when-do-you-use-git-rebase-instead-of-git-merge > >>> > >>> I suggest to do "rebase" rather than "merge" since it can keep the > commit > >>> history. Any thoughts? > >>> > >>> Tsz-Wo > >>> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
