What is the main difference between merge and rebase?

GitMiddle~1 min read

The main difference between git merge and git rebase is how they work with the commit history.

merge preserves the history, rebase rewrites the history.

Key idea (very important for an interview)

git merge - "I combine the branches as they are"
git rebase - "I rewrite my commits as if they had been made later"

Visual comparison

`git merge`

A---B---C---F---M (main)
     \         /
      D---E---

a merge commit is created
it is visible that there was a separate branch
the history branches out

`git rebase`

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

there is no merge commit
the history is linear
commits D and E became new ones

The main difference in one paragraph

Parameter	git merge	git rebase
History	Preserved	Rewritten
Merge commit	Yes (usually)	No
Safety	Safe for shared branches	Dangerous for shared branches
History	Branching	Linear
Conflicts	Once	May happen several times
Usage	Team work	Local work

When to use which

Use `merge` if:

the branch is shared
the code is already pushed
the full history matters
you work in a team

merge is the safe default option

Use `rebase` if:

the branch is only yours
you want a clean history
you are preparing code to be merged
you are updating a feature branch from main

rebase is for tidying things up

A popular phrasing for an interview

git merge combines branches, preserving the history and creating a merge commit, while git rebase moves the commits of one branch on top of another, rewriting the history and making it linear.

The golden rule (often asked)

Never rebase public branches Merge can always be done

Short Answer

Interview ready

Premium

A concise answer to help you respond confidently on this topic during an interview.