Git Rebase vs Merge: What's the Difference?

If you're working with Git regularly, you've probably used git merge without much thought. But then someone mentions git rebase — and you're not sure whether it's better, riskier, or just more confusing.

Both commands help combine code from one branch into another, but they work very differently. Understanding when to use each will help you write cleaner commit histories and avoid messy conflicts later on.

What Does git merge Do?

git merge is used to bring the changes from one branch into another. Most commonly, you merge a feature branch into main or develop when you're done working on a feature.

When you run:

git checkout main
git merge feature-branch

Git looks for the common ancestor of the two branches, compares the changes, and creates a new “merge commit” that ties the histories together.

The branch history stays intact. You can see exactly when the merge happened and what commits were brought in.

Pros of Merging

• Non-destructive — history stays intact
• Great for preserving the full development timeline
• Simple and safe for teams working together

Cons of Merging

• Can create noisy commit histories with lots of merge commits
• History becomes harder to read when many branches are merged

What Does git rebase Do?

git rebase rewrites history. Instead of merging, it moves your entire branch to start from the latest commit on another branch. It reapplies your commits one by one as if they happened just now.

Let’s say you're on feature-branch and want to update it with changes from main:

git checkout feature-branch
git rebase main

This takes the commits from feature-branch, temporarily removes them, updates the branch to match main, then re-applies the feature commits on top.

Pros of Rebasing

• Creates a cleaner, linear history
• Avoids unnecessary merge commits
• Makes git log and git bisect easier to read

Cons of Rebasing

• Can be destructive if used incorrectly
• Should not rebase shared branches without coordination
• Requires a bit more caution and understanding

Visualizing the Difference

Let’s say your main branch has two commits:

A --- B (main)

And your feature branch has two new commits:

A --- B (main)
         \
          C --- D (feature)

After Merge:

A --- B --- E (merge commit)
         \   /
          C --- D

After Rebase:

A --- B --- C' --- D' (feature rebased)

Notice how merge preserves the fork, while rebase makes it look like your work happened linearly after main.

When Should You Use Merge?

Merging is best when:

• You’re collaborating on a team and want to keep all commits visible
• You want to preserve exact history, including when branches were integrated
• You’re merging long-lived branches (like develop into main)

For example, merging pull requests on GitHub creates a merge commit by default. This is often preferred for auditing and visibility.

When Should You Use Rebase?

Rebase is ideal when:

• You want a tidy, linear history before merging into main
• You’re cleaning up a local branch before pushing
• You’re updating your feature branch with the latest main changes

A common pattern is to use rebase locally to keep your feature branch clean, then merge it into main with a pull request.

Interactive Rebase: Squashing and Rewriting Commits

git rebase -i (interactive rebase) lets you rewrite commit history with full control.

git rebase -i HEAD~3

This opens a list of the last 3 commits in your editor. You can:

• pick – Keep the commit as-is
• reword – Change the commit message
• squash – Combine with the commit above
• drop – Remove the commit entirely

Example use: Clean up a bunch of "fix typo" commits into one logical change before pushing to main.

Merge vs Rebase: Summary Table

Action	git merge	git rebase
Preserves full commit history	Yes	No (rewrites)
Creates a new commit	Yes (merge commit)	No (re-applies commits)
Safe for shared branches	Yes	Only if used carefully
Makes history cleaner	No	Yes
Conflict handling	Once per merge	Once per commit

Pro Tip: Rebase Before You Merge

One common pro workflow is this:

1. Work on a feature branch
2. Rebase it onto the latest main branch before merging
3. Then merge it via pull request

git checkout feature
git fetch origin
git rebase origin/main

This keeps your history clean, reduces conflicts, and makes reviews easier. Just be careful not to rebase if you’ve already pushed and others are depending on the branch.

A Note on Conflicts

Both merge and rebase can cause conflicts, especially when multiple branches touch the same lines of code. With merge, you resolve conflicts once. With rebase, you may need to fix them for each commit being replayed.

Use git status to see which files are in conflict, fix them manually, then run:

git add .
git rebase --continue

Repeat until the rebase completes. If things get messy, you can always cancel the process with:

git rebase --abort