Remix.run Logo
mamcx 2 hours ago

Seriously!

Why not show the names of the branch + short Id (and when is not direct name, at least "this is from NAME")

sheept 2 hours ago | parent [-]

doesn't it? Next to the conflict markers, it'll display HEAD, the ref name, or the short commit hash.

KPGv2 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I'll be honest, as a fairly skilled and experienced programmer who isn't a git expert, I know what HEAD means, but when I'm rebasing I really have no idea. It all seems to work out in the end because my collaborative work is simple and usually 2–3 people only, so I'm never rebasing against a ton of commits I lack context for (because 90% of them are my commits since I'm usually dealing with PRs to my open source projects rather than someone else's).

HEAD is "the thing we're editing now" but that's not terribly useful when rebasing since you're repeatedly editing a fake history.

gwerbin a minute ago | parent | next [-]

Git leaks a lot of implementation details into its UX. Rebasing is meant to be equivalent to checking out the "base" branch and cherry picking commits onto it. Therefore "ours" during a rebase is the base branch.

Rebasing can be confusing and hard and messy, but once I learned that rule and took the time to internalize it, it helped a lot.

lmm 33 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I avoid this problem by not rebasing.

cerved 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It does