![]() ![]() ![]() no-ff and -squash are not opposites, rather they are subtly different operations. (The rest of this is merely about why this is the case. You must forcibly delete the branch, with git branch -D instead of git branch -d. Hence, it will rebase and also combine the commits in a single commit. 12 I think your question indicates a bit of a misunderstanding. This happens because Git doesnt know that the squash merge is 'equivalent to' the various branch-specific commits. When you save and close the file, Git will perform the rebase according to your instructions. For example, if the 2nd commit fixes a small problem in the 1st commit, you can condense them into a single commit with the fixup command like below, By changing the pick command and/or re-ordering the entries, you can make the branch’s history look like whatever you want. This achieve a linear history with the benefits. Work-in-progress commits are helpful when working on a feature branch, but they aren’t necessarily important to retain in the Git history. Ive heard that it can create multiple commits in the case of an octopus merge but then I never encountered an octopus merge. You can use squash and merge to create a more streamlined Git history in your repository. This listing defines exactly what the branch will look like after the rebase is performed. A squash merge will condense all the commits that you made in featureBranch into one single commit and that commit will be added on top of whats currently at the HEAD. This will open a text editor listing all of the commits that are about to be moved ![]() For example, in your case, you can use the following commands. Using rebase will open an interactive shell which will help you merge a number of commits into a single commit and also to move the head of the fork branch to the latest commit in the master branch. For instance, you can do this using a feature called git rebase -i Only thing I can come up with is that git bisect will not be as efficient after having squashed. I haven't found a good comparison yet that shows cons and pros of each opinion. When this option is enabled, instead of attaching all commits under. There are a couple of ways you can perform this. what are the pros or cons of squashing before merging I hear a lot of people wanting to squash commits prior merging and a lot of them are against it. Summary: Implement a configuration option for bors to produce squash merge commits. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |