Goodbye Git Merge, Hello Git Rebase for Local Development and Squash Merges for Clean Main Branches

The decision between using Git Merge or Rebase can significantly impact the history and organization of your project. Understanding these processes and their implications on your repository's commit history is an important aspect of maintaining clean and understandable records.


Why Choose Git Merge over Git Rebase?

Git Merge integrates changes from different branches while preserving the historical context of each commit. This method is particularly beneficial for maintaining a comprehensive and traceable project history. When you merge branches, all commits from the source branch are added to the target branch in a non-linear fashion, creating a complete and transparent timeline of changes. In contrast, Git Rebase re-applies commits from a source branch onto a target branch, creating a linear history. While this can make the history cleaner by removing merge commits, it can also rewrite commit history, which can be problematic for collaborative workflows.


One key advantage of using Git Merge is that it retains the entire history of changes, making it easier to trace the origin of specific modifications. This is especially useful for debugging and understanding the evolution of your codebase. For example, imagine a scenario where your team has integrated a new feature branch into the main branch, but shortly after the integration, a bug is reported.


With a comprehensive commit history preserved through Git Merge, you can easily trace back through the commits to pinpoint exactly which change introduced the bug. By examining the commit messages, code changes, and any associated documentation or comments, you can understand the context and reasoning behind each modification.


Here's a step-by-step example of how debugging might take place:


  • 1. Identify the Bug: A bug is reported after the feature branch is merged into the main branch.
  • 2. Trace the History: Use `git log` to view the commit history on the main branch. Each commit message provides a snapshot of changes, helping you locate when the bug first appeared.
  • 3. Pinpoint the Commit: Narrow down the problematic commit by reviewing the changes introduced in each commit. For instance, if the bug pertains to a specific functionality, you can look at commits related to that functionality.
  • 4. Understand the Context: Read through the detailed commit messages and code changes. Comments and documentation included in the commits can provide insights into why certain changes were made.
  • 5. Debug the Issue: With the exact commit identified, you can revert the specific changes or apply a fix. Understanding the original intent behind the changes helps in crafting an appropriate solution.

This process highlights the utility of Git Merge in maintaining a clear and traceable history, making it simpler to debug issues and understand the evolution of your codebase.


For instance, consider the following commit history:


          *   commit f1 (Merge branch 'feature-branch')
          |\
          | * commit f2 (Implement feature)
          | * commit f3 (Fix bug in feature)
          * | commit m1 (Update documentation)
          * | commit m2 (Refactor code)
          |/
          * commit b1 (Initial commit)

In this example, the merge commit `f1` shows the integration of `feature-branch` into the main branch while preserving the individual commits `f2` and `f3`. This makes it easy to track the changes introduced by the feature and the subsequent bug fix. With Git Rebase, this history would be linear, potentially losing the context provided by the separate commits.


Consider how this linear history might look with Git Rebase:


        * commit f3 (Fix bug in feature)
        * commit f2 (Implement feature)
        * commit m2 (Refactor code)
        * commit m1 (Update documentation)
        * commit b1 (Initial commit)

In the linear history, the individual commits from the feature branch are interspersed with main branch commits, potentially obscuring the context of changes and making it harder to trace the origin of issues.


The Process of Merging with Squash

To keep your main branch clean and organized, you can use the "squash" option when merging. Squashing combines all commits from the feature branch into a single commit before merging it into the main branch. This approach helps reduce clutter in the main branch's history and makes it easier to understand the context of changes. You can use your repository's merge settings to enable squash merging, or you can perform a squash merge manually.


Here's how you can perform a squash merge:


          # Checkout the main branch
          git checkout main
  
          # Merge the feature branch with squash
          git merge --squash feature-branch
  
          # Commit the changes
          git commit -m "Merge feature-branch with squash"

By squashing commits, you preserve the detailed history in the feature branch while presenting a concise and clean commit on the main branch. This method ensures that the main branch remains easy to navigate and understand.


Benefits of Squashing Commits

Squashing commits offers several advantages. It simplifies the commit history on the main branch, making it easier for developers to review and understand the changes. It helps save memory by reducing the number of individual commits stored in the repository. It provides a clear record of feature development, which is beneficial for both current team members and future contributors.


Another advantage of squashing is that it facilitates better project management. By maintaining a clean and organized commit history, you can quickly identify the source of issues and track the progression of features. This clarity is invaluable during code reviews, feature rollbacks, or when onboarding new team members.


In conclusion, choosing Git Merge over Rebase is a strategic decision that helps preserve the integrity of your project's history. By incorporating squash merges, you can maintain a clean and organized main branch while still capturing the detailed development process in feature branches. This balanced approach ensures a robust and comprehensible version control system, ultimately contributing to the efficiency and effectiveness of your development workflow.

← Back to Blog List
@