Git Merge vs Rebase: Understanding the Key Differences

Learn the crucial differences between git merge and git rebase, and when to use each command. Understanding these commands will help you maintain clean commit histories and collaborate effectively in team environments.

Know More Team
January 27, 2025
5 min read
GitMergeRebaseVersion ControlBranching

Git Merge vs Rebase: Understanding the Key Differences

Understanding the difference between git merge and git rebase is crucial for effective Git workflow management. Both commands integrate changes from one branch to another, but they do it in very different ways. This article will help you understand when and why to use each command for better collaboration and cleaner commit histories.

The Core Difference

The fundamental distinction between these two commands lies in how they handle commit history:

  • git merge integrates changes by creating a new merge commit, preserving the history of both branches
  • git rebase moves your branch on top of another, rewriting commit history to create a linear sequence

Understanding Git Merge

Let's say you have two branches:

  • main
  • feature (branched off earlier from main)

How Git Merge Works

git checkout feature
git merge main

This pulls changes from main into feature and creates a merge commit, resulting in this history:

A---B---C (main)
     \
      D---E---F (feature)
             \
              G (merge commit)

Pros of Git Merge

  • Preserves full history and context - You can see exactly when and how branches were integrated
  • Safer in teams - No history rewriting, so it's safe for shared branches
  • Good for long-lived shared branches - Maintains the complete development timeline
  • Non-destructive - Original commits remain unchanged

Cons of Git Merge

  • History becomes messy with many merge commits
  • Harder to trace linear commit flow - Can create complex branching patterns
  • More merge commits - Each merge creates an additional commit

Understanding Git Rebase

How Git Rebase Works

git checkout feature
git rebase main

This re-applies your commits on top of the latest main, resulting in this clean, linear history:

A---B---C (main)
             \
              D'---E'---F' (rebased feature)

Pros of Git Rebase

  • Clean, linear history - Creates a straight line of commits
  • Easier to git log and git bisect - Simpler to navigate and debug
  • Preferred before merging short-lived branches into main
  • Professional appearance - Creates a clean, organized commit history

Cons of Git Rebase

  • Rewrites commit history - Changes commit hashes and timestamps
  • Risky if already pushed - Can cause problems if others have based work on it
  • Not ideal for shared/public branches - Can disrupt other developers' work
  • Loses some context - The original branching structure is flattened

Visual Comparison

Git Merge vs Rebase

When to Use Each Command

ScenarioUse merge when...Use rebase when...
CollaborationYou're working on shared branchesYou're working alone or before a PR merge
HistoryYou want to preserve commit contextYou want a clean, linear history
SafetyHistory safety is a concernYou're cleaning up before pushing
Team WorkMultiple developers on the same branchPersonal feature branches

Practical Examples

Example 1: Team Collaboration (Use Merge)

# Working on a shared feature branch
git checkout feature-branch
git merge main  # Integrate latest changes safely

Example 2: Personal Development (Use Rebase)

# Working on your own feature branch
git checkout my-feature
git rebase main  # Clean up history before pushing

Best Practices

Use Git Merge When:

  • Working on shared branches with other developers
  • You want to preserve the complete development history
  • History safety is a primary concern
  • Working with long-lived branches

Use Git Rebase When:

  • Working on personal feature branches
  • You want to clean up commit history before pushing
  • Preparing to merge a feature branch into main
  • You're the only developer working on the branch

Common Workflows

Workflow 1: Feature Branch Development

# 1. Create and work on feature branch
git checkout -b feature/new-feature
# ... make commits ...

# 2. Rebase to clean up history
git rebase main

# 3. Merge into main
git checkout main
git merge feature/new-feature

Workflow 2: Team Collaboration

# 1. Work on shared branch
git checkout shared-feature
# ... make commits ...

# 2. Merge latest changes
git merge main

# 3. Continue development
# ... more commits ...

Conclusion

The choice between git merge and git rebase depends on your workflow preferences and team collaboration needs:

  • Use git merge when you want to preserve history and work safely with others
  • Use git rebase when you want clean, linear history and are working independently

Table of Contents

Navigate the scroll
Reading Progress