Comment by ubercore 2 hours ago I've never even seen someone suggest a rebase master onto feature workflow! TIL. 2 comments ubercore Reply dools 2 hours ago I think the terminology would be the other way around, like you're rebasing the feature onto the main:git checkout featuregit rebase maingit checkout maingit merge featurethat way you get all your conflicts on the feature branch during rebase and your merge is always clean. barbazoo 1 hour ago > I get all my conflicts on branches because I rebase before mergingPretty sure it's the other way around. You're on the branch and rebase it atop current master. If you merge after that, you won't have merge conflicts.
dools 2 hours ago I think the terminology would be the other way around, like you're rebasing the feature onto the main:git checkout featuregit rebase maingit checkout maingit merge featurethat way you get all your conflicts on the feature branch during rebase and your merge is always clean.
barbazoo 1 hour ago > I get all my conflicts on branches because I rebase before mergingPretty sure it's the other way around. You're on the branch and rebase it atop current master. If you merge after that, you won't have merge conflicts.
I think the terminology would be the other way around, like you're rebasing the feature onto the main:
git checkout feature
git rebase main
git checkout main
git merge feature
that way you get all your conflicts on the feature branch during rebase and your merge is always clean.
> I get all my conflicts on branches because I rebase before merging
Pretty sure it's the other way around. You're on the branch and rebase it atop current master. If you merge after that, you won't have merge conflicts.