Without rebasing, tools for managing PRs might show the merged mainline commits in the PR.
Some times they are described as such “merged master into feature” and can be avoided if you review the PR per commit. But more often I want to review the PR as a whole, and then the tool fails to show a good diff of what’s actually developed in the PR. This to me is a much larger problem than the log pollution, which can be solved by squashing.
Other than that (missing the bigger reason for rebase and focusing on a lesser argument in my opinion) I quite agree with the article.
Comments
Without rebasing, tools for managing PRs might show the merged mainline commits in the PR.
Some times they are described as such “merged master into feature” and can be avoided if you review the PR per commit. But more often I want to review the PR as a whole, and then the tool fails to show a good diff of what’s actually developed in the PR. This to me is a much larger problem than the log pollution, which can be solved by squashing.
Other than that (missing the bigger reason for rebase and focusing on a lesser argument in my opinion) I quite agree with the article.