Advertisement
Interview Question
Explain the difference between git merge and git rebase. When would you use one over the other?
Key Points to Cover
- `git merge` combines branches and preserves history
- `git rebase` rewrites history by applying commits on top of another branch
- Use merge for shared repos; rebase for cleaner local history
Evaluation Rubric
Explains what merge does30% weight
Explains what rebase does30% weight
Provides correct usage scenarios40% weight
Hints
- 💡Think: history preservation vs linear history
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
- ⚠️Misunderstanding that `git rebase` rewrites commit history, leading to confusion or issues.
- ⚠️Rebasing branches that have already been pushed to a shared remote repository (rebasing public history).
- ⚠️Not understanding the difference in the resulting history graph (linear vs. branching).
- ⚠️Over-using `git rebase` in situations where `git merge` would provide better historical context.
- ⚠️Focusing too much on the command syntax rather than the practical implications for team collaboration and project history.
Potential Follow-up Questions
- ❓When would rebase cause conflicts?
- ❓Why avoid rebasing public branches?
Advertisement
Related Questions
Questions that share similar topics with this one