• Git visualiser: Web App

• Git Rebase Docs: Docs

When working with Git for version control, two common commands developers often use to integrate changes are git merge and git rebase. Both serve to combine branches, but they do so in different ways, each with its own strengths and use cases. Understanding the difference between git merge and git rebase can help you choose the right approach for your project.

git merge is a straightforward way to combine the changes of one branch into another. It creates a merge commit that brings together the histories of both branches.

How It Works:

• You switch to the branch you want to merge into (usually main or master).

• You run git merge <branch-name>.

• Git automatically creates a merge commit, keeping the commit history from both branches intact.

Example:

In this example, the changes from feature-branch are integrated into main with a new merge commit.

Pros of Git Merge:

• Preserves complete history: You can see exactly when the merge happened and retain the entire context of both branches.

• Safe and simple: Great for teams who want a clear, visible history of merges between branches.

Cons of Git Merge:

• Messy commit history: In a busy project, frequent merges can clutter the commit history with many merge commits.

git rebase rewrites commit history by applying your changes on top of another branch. Instead of creating a merge commit, it shifts the base of your current branch to a different point in time.

How It Works:

• You switch to the branch you want to rebase.

• You run git rebase <base-branch>.

• Git applies each commit from your branch on top of the base branch.

Example:

In this example, all commits from feature-branch will be rebased onto the main branch, creating a linear history.

Pros of Git Rebase:

• Cleaner commit history: It avoids merge commits, resulting in a more linear and easier-to-read history.

• Streamlines collaboration: When working with multiple collaborators, rebase makes it easier to follow the sequence of commits.

Cons of Git Rebase:

• Potential for confusion: Rebasing rewrites history, which can cause issues if not handled properly, especially when working on shared branches.

• Loss of context: While the history becomes linear, it may lose the context of when branches were merged or how they evolved.

When to Use Git Merge

• For collaborative projects: When working with multiple developers on a shared codebase, git merge is typically the safer option. It preserves the complete history, making it easier to track changes.

• When history matters: If you want to maintain the full context of branch creation and merges, git merge keeps everything intact.

When to Use Git Rebase

• For a cleaner history: If you're working alone or prefer a more linear project history, git rebase helps create a streamlined, readable commit log.

• Before merging to the main branch: Rebasing your feature branch onto main before merging ensures that your branch integrates cleanly without additional merge commits.

Both git merge and git rebase are powerful commands with their own unique benefits. Git merge is perfect for preserving the full history of changes and is ideal for larger teams. On the other hand, git rebase is great for maintaining a clean, linear history, especially when working in a solo or small-team environment.

Choosing between the two depends on the structure of your project and your team's workflow preferences. Understanding the strengths of each approach ensures you can integrate changes in a way that best suits your development process.