|
|
|
|
|
by plicense
3203 days ago
|
|
My thoughts precisely. I mostly use rebase, except when I know multiple commits in my feature branch will cause merge conflict with master - in that case, I save myself the trouble, do a merge and be done with resolving all conflicts in one go. My ideology is - prefer rebase first, resort to merge if it will let you do the gnarly merge fast. Of course this is because of the development environment I work in where we just don't use bisect and the workflow is different. I also keep in mind that if I work on a different repository with differing testing/development processes this ideology will change. The first few days I work on any new project(due to a job/project transition), I figure out how I can iterate as fast as I can and see what my time saving points are. How to best use the git I know, on the current repo, is also a minor part of this poking process. |
|