Merge vs Rebase: When to Use Each Git Strategy for Clean History

Hello, I'm Su San. Do you use merge or rebase when combining code?

Merge

Merge creates a new merge commit that preserves the histories of both branches, resulting in a complete log. It is useful when you want to keep every individual change and see a full picture of how branches were combined.

Typical workflow:

git checkout main
git pull origin main
git merge dev
# resolve conflicts if any
git commit -m "Merge dev into main"
git push origin main

After merging, the main branch graph can look tangled because all commits from the merged branch are retained.

Rebase

Rebase reapplies the changes of a branch onto the target branch, rewriting history into a linear sequence without creating a merge commit, resulting in a clean and straightforward log.

Typical workflow:

git checkout dev
git pull origin dev
git rebase main
# resolve conflicts if any
git rebase --continue
git push origin dev --force

Squash

During a rebase you can use the squash option to compress multiple commits into a single one, e.g., turning three feature commits (A, B, C) into a single commit (F) on the main branch.

Command example:

git checkout dev
git rebase -i HEAD~3
# change "pick" to "squash" for the desired commits
# edit the combined commit message
git push origin dev --force

Choosing a Method

Use merge if you want to retain full branch history and are comfortable with merge commits, which is helpful for team collaboration and audit trails. Use rebase if you prefer a tidy, linear history, especially for projects where a clean commit log is important. The choice depends on team conventions, project complexity, and whether multiple long‑living branches are involved.