Hacker News Reader

Comment by aulin | Hacker News Reader

Why would you have to force anything with rebase? you rebase your feature branch against main to rewind it on top of it and clean up history so you can do a clean fast forward merge. Squashing is bad for anything non trivial, you want small independent commits: easy to review, easy to revert, easy to blame if something goes wrong.

View on HN

As soon as you pushed your branch to remote (which I tend to do for backup reasons especially after working hard on a solution) rebase only means trouble.

Not if it's the remote for your own dev branch. It only matters if the remote branch is being (actively) used by other people.

Unfortunately I've met far too many who have your "remote" superstition. I remember arguing this exact point in my last gig, when someone was mad at me for force pushing my own remote branch that nobody else was using nor should have been.

if you're the only one working on that branch I don't see where is the problem in rewriting history and force pushing

Until you make a mistake.

Why? That's what 'git reflog' is for.

Or you mean that a mistake where you accidentally push to someone else's branch?

The default model that public github uses is good for that: everyone works on their own fork of the repo, and makes pull requests to the shared repo. Nobody pushes directly to the shared repo.

Second. Github not an option for a lot/most work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com