Git Merge vs Git Rebase: What’s the Difference and Which is Better?

Ahoy, fellow developers! Are you tired of the constant battle between git rebase and git merge for the ultimate commit history supremacy? Fear not, for we have come to the rescue! In this article, we will compare git rebase vs merge in a fun and interactive way, complete with real-life examples and diagrams. So, grab your popcorn and let the battle begin!

Alice & Bob

Meet Alice and Bob, two developers who work for a company that develops software for the healthcare industry. Alice is a big fan of git merge, while Bob prefers git rebase.

Conversation

Alice: Hey Bob, have you ever used git merge?

Bob: Yeah, I have, but I prefer git rebase. It's much cleaner.

Alice: I see. I’m a big fan of git merge. I think it's simpler and easier to understand.

Bob: Really? I think git rebase is simpler because it keeps a linear commit history.

Alice: But git merge creates a merge commit that shows how changes were integrated.

Bob: That’s true, but git rebase applies changes directly onto the branch, which makes the history easier to read.

Alice: But git merge is more flexible. You can merge changes from multiple branches at once.

Bob: Yes, but git rebase lets you apply changes from one branch onto another, which is useful when you want to keep the changes in order.

Explanation of Git Merge:

Alice: Let me show you how git merge works. Suppose we have two branches, main and feature, and we want to integrate the changes from feature into main. Here’s what the commit history looks like before the merge:

        A --- B --- C  main
             \
              D --- E --- F  new-feature

Alice: To merge, just run

git checkout main
git merge feature

Alice: After running git merge, the commit history looks like this:

        A --- B --- C --- G  main
             \         /
              D --- E --- F  new-feature

Alice: See how the merge commit G combines the changes from new-feature into main? That's the power of git merge.

Bob: Right, git merge combines the changes from feature into main, creating a new commit that reflects the merge.

Alice: Exactly, and one of the benefits of git merge is that it's flexible. You can merge changes from multiple branches at once if you need to.

Bob: I get it, but I think it makes the commit history look messy.

Explanation of Git Rebase:

Bob: While git merge is great, I think git rebase has some advantages. Here's how it works. Suppose we have the same two branches, main and feature, and we want to integrate the changes from feature into main.

Bob: Let me show you an example of git rebase. Here's what the commit history looks like before the rebase:

        A --- B --- C  main
             \
              D --- E --- F  new-feature

Bob: First, run

git checkout feature
git rebase main

Bob: After running git rebase, the commit history looks like this:

                    D --- E --- F  new-feature
                   /
        A --- B --- C  main

Bob: See how the changes from new-feature are applied directly onto main? This creates a clean, linear commit history that's easy to read.

Alice: I see what you mean, but I still think git merge is more flexible.

Bob: That’s true, but git rebase is better for keeping a clean commit history, which can be important for long-term projects.

Comparison of Git Merge vs Git Rebase

Alice: I agree that git rebase has some benefits, but I think git merge is more versatile. For example, if we have multiple branches that need to be merged, git merge can handle that easily.

Bob: I can see that, but git rebase can handle the same scenario too. You just need to use the interactive mode of git rebase.

Alice: That’s true, but git merge is simpler and easier to use in most cases.

Bob: I think it’s a matter of personal preference, and the best option depends on the project’s specific needs.

Conclusion

In the end, the battle between git rebase and git merge is not a battle at all. It all depends on what kind of commit history you want to have. Git merge keeps the branch history intact, while git rebase creates a linear commit history. So, choose wisely, young padawans! And may the commit history be ever in your favor!

Note: In this conversation, Alice and Bob are fictional characters, but their preferences for git rebase and git merge are based on real-life experiences of developers who use these commands.

Don’t forget to give it a clap and follow me. Have feedback or question let’s get connected by Clicking Here