Rebasing vs. Merging – Understanding Different Workflows in Git

Why Understand Rebasing vs. Merging?

When working with Git, you often need to combine changes from different branches. Two common methods for integrating changes are merging and rebasing.

✅ Merging – Maintains commit history but can create extra merge commits.
✅ Rebasing – Creates a linear commit history but rewrites commits.

Both have their use cases, advantages, and potential pitfalls. Let's explore when and how to use each!

What is Git Merging?

Merging combines two branches by creating a new commit that ties them together.

How to Merge a Branch in Git

1️⃣ Switch to the target branch (e.g., main):

git checkout main

2️⃣ Merge the feature branch:

git merge feature-branch

3️⃣ Push the changes:

git push origin main

Pros of Merging

✔ Preserves commit history – No changes to existing commits.
✔ Clear branch tracking – Shows when and where branches were merged.
✔ Safe and easy to use – Great for team collaboration.

Cons of Merging

❌ Creates extra merge commits – Can clutter the commit history.
❌ Can lead to complex histories – Many branches merging into main create a non-linear history.

When to Use Merging?

  • Team projects with multiple contributors – Keeps a full record of when branches were merged.
  • Feature branches with multiple commits – Avoids altering the history of others’ contributions.
  • When you want a visual history of merges – Useful for auditing and tracking changes over time.

What is Git Rebasing?

Rebasing moves your branch’s commits onto another branch, rewriting history as if the branch was created from the latest commit.

How to Rebase a Branch in Git

1️⃣ Switch to the feature branch:

git checkout feature-branch

2️⃣ Rebase onto main:

git rebase main

3️⃣ Resolve any conflicts, then continue:

git rebase --continue

4️⃣ Push the rebased branch:

git push origin feature-branch --force

Pros of Rebasing

✔ Creates a cleaner commit history – No extra merge commits.
✔ Linear history – Looks like all changes happened sequentially.
✔ Easier to read with git log – Makes debugging and tracking changes simpler.

Cons of Rebasing

❌ Rewrites commit history – Can cause issues if working with shared branches.
❌ Not ideal for team collaboration – Force-pushing after a rebase can overwrite teammates' work.

When to Use Rebasing?

  • Before merging a feature branch into main – Helps create a linear history for easier debugging.
  • For personal branches – If you’re the only contributor, rebasing keeps your history clean.
  • When working with long-running feature branches – Keeps them up-to-date with main without unnecessary merge commits.

When to Use Merge vs. Rebase?

Scenario Use Merge? Use Rebase?
Working in a team project ✅ Yes ❌ No (avoids history rewriting)
Keeping a clean commit history ❌ No ✅ Yes
Updating a feature branch before merging ❌ No ✅ Yes
Merging long-running branches ✅ Yes ❌ No
Working on a personal branch ❌ No ✅ Yes

Best Practices for Rebasing and Merging

Use merging when working with shared branches to avoid rewriting history.
Use rebasing to clean up local commits before merging a feature branch.
Avoid force-pushing after rebasing on shared branches – it can cause conflicts.
Use interactive rebase (git rebase -i) to squash or edit commits before merging.
Use git merge --no-ff when merging if you want to retain commit history while avoiding unnecessary merge commits.

Next Steps

Now that you understand rebasing and merging, explore more Git topics:

Using Git Tags – Learn how to track releases and milestones.
Git Best Practices – Keep your repository structured and clean.
Using Git in Large Projects – Manage large repositories with best practices.

Need help? Check the official Git documentation or ask in the comments!