Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Comments on Why is git merge from rather than to?
Parent
Why is git merge from rather than to?
Why does git merge take the source branch rather than the destination branch as a parameter?
The most common merge case by far for me is "Okay, this branch looks good, let's merge it into branch X", where X is often something like master.
Normally, if you're merging, you would expect that some new commits have arrived on the branch recently. If these came from git commit, then obviously you would have the source branch checked out already, which necessitates a clumsy checkout and merge. If these came from git fetch, then you would likewise want to checkout the source branch and see the changes first.
I struggle to think of any use cases for merging from. Why was the merge command designed this way?
Post
I struggle to think of any use cases for merging from. Why was the merge command designed this way?
The model here is that many developers on the same project are using branches to develop features independently; someone has to be in charge, and that is the person responsible for the master (release) branch that will be used to tag, package and distribute releases of the software. From that person's perspective, merges are naturally into the same branch, which is practically always the destination. It's the source that needs to be specified, because it's the source that varies.
1 comment thread
2 comment threads