Git Rebase's Two-Phase Mystery: Why Isn't It Just a Merge? 🤔

The Confusion 😕

Backend Dev: "I don't understand why we have Phase 2 in rebasing. I thought it would be as simple as running a merge command. But in rebase, I think we do merge command too? Why the extra step?"

Frontend Mentor: "Ah! This is one of the most common confusions about Git rebase. Let me show you what's really happening under the hood."

The Setup 🎬

Let's say you have this situation:

# You're on frontend branch
git status
# On branch frontend

Your Git history looks like this:

main:     A---B  ← (main pointer is here)
               \
frontend:       C---D---E  ← (frontend pointer is here)

Phase 1: Git Rebase 🔄

Backend Dev: "Okay, so I run git rebase main..."

Frontend Mentor: "Right! But here's the key - rebase does NOT touch the main branch at all!"

git rebase main
# Replaying commits on top of main...

After the rebase:

main:     A---B  ← (main pointer HASN'T MOVED!)

frontend: A---B---C'---D'---E'  ← (frontend pointer moved here)

Backend Dev: "Wait, what? The main pointer didn't move? I thought rebase would update main!"

Frontend Mentor: "Exactly! That's the misconception. Rebase only updates the current branch (frontend). It replays your commits on top of main, but main itself stays where it was."

Visual Breakdown 📊

Let me show you what each command does:

Before Any Operations

         C---D---E  (frontend)
        /
A---B  (main)

After git rebase main (while on frontend)

                  C'---D'---E'  (frontend)
                 /
A---B  (main - HASN'T MOVED!)

Backend Dev: "So rebase created new commits (C', D', E') but didn't update main?"

Frontend Mentor: "Exactly! The prime symbols (') indicate these are new commits with the same changes but different base."

Phase 2: Git Merge 🔀

Backend Dev: "So that's why we need Phase 2?"

Frontend Mentor: "Yes! Now you need to update main to include your rebased commits:"

git checkout main
git merge frontend

After the merge:

                  C'---D'---E'  (frontend)
                 /
A---B-----------  (main - NOW moved here!)

Wait, let me fix that diagram:

A---B---C'---D'---E'  (main, frontend - both pointing here!)

Backend Dev: "NOW main has caught up!"

The Key Distinction 🔑

Frontend Mentor: "Here's the crucial difference between rebase and merge:"

Operation	What It Does	Which Branches It Updates
Rebase	Replays commits on a new base	Only the current branch
Merge	Combines branch histories	Only the current branch

Backend Dev: "So both operations only update the current branch?"

Frontend Mentor: "YES! Git never modifies a branch you're not currently on. This is a fundamental safety feature."

Why This Two-Phase Design? 🤔

Backend Dev: "But why not just do it all in one step?"

Frontend Mentor: "Great question! This design gives you three important benefits:"

1. Review Opportunity 👀

git rebase main
# Now you can review the rebased commits before updating main
git log --oneline

2. Testing Window 🧪

git rebase main
# Test that everything still works
npm run test
# Only then update main
git checkout main && git merge frontend

3. Decision Point 🎯

git rebase main
# You can decide if you actually want to merge
# Or maybe you want to do more work first

Your Specific Case 🎯

Backend Dev: "In my case, main hasn't moved since I created frontend. What happens then?"

Frontend Mentor: "Excellent observation! Let's see:"

Before Rebase

main:     A---B
               \
frontend:       C---D---E

After git rebase main

main:     A---B

frontend: A---B---C---D---E  (commits stay the same!)

Backend Dev: "The commits don't change because they're already based on the latest main?"

Frontend Mentor: "Exactly! Git will say 'Current branch frontend is up to date.' But you still need Phase 2:"

git checkout main
git merge frontend
# This is a "fast-forward" merge

After Fast-Forward Merge:

A---B---C---D---E  (main, frontend - both here!)

The Aha Moment 💡

Backend Dev: "So rebase is like moving commits to a new base, but merge is like moving the branch pointer to include those commits?"

Frontend Mentor: "PERFECT! That's exactly it!"

Rebase:  Moves COMMITS to new base
         Updates: current branch only

Merge:   Moves BRANCH POINTER forward
         Updates: current branch only

Common Mistakes ❌

Mistake 1: Expecting Rebase to Update Target Branch

git checkout frontend
git rebase main
# ❌ Thinking: "This updates main"
# ✅ Reality: "This only updates frontend"

Mistake 2: Forgetting Phase 2

git checkout frontend
git rebase main
# ❌ Stopping here - main still doesn't have your commits
# ✅ Need: git checkout main && git merge frontend

Mistake 3: Confusing Rebase with Merge

# ❌ Thinking they're the same
git rebase main  # Replays commits (creates new commits)
git merge main   # Combines histories (creates merge commit)

# ✅ They serve different purposes!

The Complete Workflow 🔄

Frontend Mentor: "Here's the full picture:"

# Phase 1: Rebase (update frontend to include latest main)
git checkout frontend
git rebase main
# Result: frontend has new base, main unchanged

# Phase 2: Merge (update main to include frontend)
git checkout main
git merge frontend
# Result: main now has frontend's commits

Real-World Analogy 🏗️

Backend Dev: "Can you give me a real-world analogy?"

Frontend Mentor: "Sure! Imagine you're building a house extension:"

Rebase (Phase 1):

• You rebuild your extension on the new foundation (latest main)
• Your extension changes, but the main house stays the same
• You can inspect the extension before connecting it

Merge (Phase 2):

• You connect the extension to the main house
• Now the main house includes the extension
• The change is permanent

Backend Dev: "So rebase prepares the changes, merge applies them!"

Frontend Mentor: "Exactly! 🎯"

Why Not Just Use Merge? 🤷

Backend Dev: "If rebase needs merge anyway, why not just merge from the start?"

Frontend Mentor: "Great question! Compare the histories:"

Using Only Merge

git checkout main
git merge frontend

Result:

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

Creates a merge commit M, history shows branching.

Using Rebase + Merge

git checkout frontend
git rebase main
git checkout main
git merge frontend

Result:

A---B---C'---D'---E'  (main, frontend)

Clean linear history, no merge commit needed.

Backend Dev: "So rebase gives us a cleaner history!"

Frontend Mentor: "Yes! That's the main benefit of the two-phase approach."

Key Takeaways 🎯

1. Rebase Only Moves Current Branch

   • Never updates the target branch
   • Creates new commits on new base

2. Merge Completes the Process

   • Moves branch pointer forward
   • Makes changes visible on target branch

3. Two Phases Give Control

   • Review rebased commits
   • Test before merging
   • Decision point

4. Git Never Modifies Other Branches

   • Safety feature
   • Predictable behavior

5. Rebase ≠ Merge

   • Rebase: Replay commits
   • Merge: Combine histories

The Rule of Thumb 📏

Frontend Mentor: "Remember this simple rule:"

Rebase:  Changes YOUR branch
Merge:   Changes THE branch you're merging into

Both only change the CURRENT branch!

Backend Dev: "So if I want to update main, I must be ON main when I merge?"

Frontend Mentor: "YES! Now you've got it! 🎉"

Conclusion 🏁

The two-phase nature of rebase isn't a bug - it's a feature! It gives you:

• Control over when changes are applied
• Opportunity to review and test
• Clean, linear history
• Safety through separation of concerns

Backend Dev: "This makes so much sense now. Rebase is about preparing commits, merge is about applying them!"

Frontend Mentor: "Perfect understanding! You've mastered one of Git's most confusing concepts! 🚀"

---

Have you been confused by Git rebase's two-phase workflow? Share your experience in the comments below! 💭