Git rebase vs merge

Git rebase and merge both integrate changes from one branch into another. Where they differ is how it's done. Git rebase moves a feature branch into a master. Git merge adds a new commit, preserving the history

Git rebase vs merge

If you want to see the history completely same as it happened, you should use merge. Merge preserves history whereas rebase rewrites it.
Rebasing is better to streamline a complex history, you are able to change the commit history by interactive rebase. 
You can remove undesired commits, squash two or more commits into one or edit the commit message.
Rebase will present conflicts one commit at a time whereas merge will present them all at once.
It is better and much easier to handle the conflicts but you shouldn’t forget that
reverting a rebase is much more difficult than reverting a merge if there are many conflicts. 
You can find details of a basic rebase process from git — Basic Rebase .

Git pull vs rebase

git pull fetches the latest changes of the current branch from a remote and applies those changes to your local copy of the branch. 
Generally this is done by merging, i.e. the local changes are merged into the remote changes. So git pull is similar to git fetch & git merge.

git pull --rebase :
The local changes you made will be rebased on top of the remote changes, instead of being merged with the remote changes.

Similar codes

59 votes117 views6 answers
Apache restart
Shell/Bash
0 vote111 views1 answer
Git accept incoming changes for all
Shell/Bash
0 vote112 views1 answer
Example use >&
Shell/Bash
0 vote115 views2 answers
Check memcached status
Shell/Bash
0 vote108 views1 answer
How to open gofer in command prompt
Shell/Bash
0 vote132 views1 answer
Ubuntu camera not longer found
Shell/Bash
7 votes71 views2 answers
Pod cache clean
Shell/Bash
2 votes118 views1 answer
Apache enable mod reqrite
Shell/Bash
0 vote173 views1 answer
Brew error
Shell/Bash
0 vote123 views1 answer
Run command from history ubuntu
Shell/Bash