The ironic thing about this is that the link they post as a justification for rebasing feature branches onto develop is actually a very explicit reason _not_ to be rebasing in this situation.
The section reads like the author thinks that the problem with rebasing public branches is merge conflicts (it isn't; it's rewritten/diverging histories) and that interactively rebasing somehow resolves this problem (it doesn't).
This smacks of something that I come across all the time: strong opinions on how to use Git held by people who don't actually understand Git.
The section reads like the author thinks that the problem with rebasing public branches is merge conflicts (it isn't; it's rewritten/diverging histories) and that interactively rebasing somehow resolves this problem (it doesn't).
This smacks of something that I come across all the time: strong opinions on how to use Git held by people who don't actually understand Git.