BitBucket Offers Git Support

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 02-11-2011 16:33, Kagamin wrote:
> Alex Rønne Petersen Wrote:
>
>> 3) This is absolutely essential in distributed development. When you
>> work on a large feature in a fork, you typically end up with lots of
>> commits. When you send this work upstream, you don't want to cause noise
>> in the history. Rebasing helps in avoiding this by squashing commits
>> together to get a nice, clean history.
>
> I thought, a developer pushes his changes as a branch, which is later merged to main. Merge is done as one big commit, so the main branch looks like 1. merge database, 2. merge collections, 3. merge gui - isn't this your clean history?

The merge itself can be a commit (if you use git merge instead of git 
pull), but there is no reason to eliminate the *entire* history when 
pulling in a branch. That's just the SVN way of doing things, which is 
just silly.

Folding commits together makes sense if you have, say, one commit 
implementing some feature and two subsequent commits adding minor fixes 
to it.

- Alex