[yurishimo]

I've often found that many problems when working in teams can be traced back to `rebase`. I understand the benefits, but if you're already working on a team where history is not used in any serious way, then you cut out a lot of foot-guns by only using `merge`.

[Hendrikto]

> if you're already working on a team where history is not used in any serious way

Then you are doing it wrong. Sadly this is very common.

[zwischenzug]

Except the "merge mess" footgun.

I got into training people in Git (I now do it for O'Reilly) because I worked with 12 teams that merged _everything_ into sub-branches. The result was that the `git log --oneline` command resulted in screensful of just pipes.

My initial training goal in training was getting my students to understand a rebase to avoid that mess.

[psychoslave]

Can you point to your course in O'Reilly catalogue please?

[zwischenzug]

https://learning.oreilly.com/live-events/git-clinic/07901450...