Why I Stopped Using Plain Git Pull (And Why You Should Too)

Picture this: It's late Friday afternoon, and you're ready to push that feature you've been working on all week. Your code is clean, tested, and ready to go. But wait - Git rejects your push with a cryptic message about the remote branch being ahead of yours. Sound familiar?

We've all been there. Your colleague (let's call him Hanish) beat you to it and pushed his changes first. The knee-jerk reaction? Hitting git pull and hoping for the best. I did this for years until I discovered there's a better way.

The Hidden Cost of Your Git Pull Habit

Here's the thing about git pull that nobody talks about: it's secretly making your project's history messier with every use. Each time you pull, Git creates a merge commit - think of it as a knot in your project's timeline. One or two knots? No big deal. But after months of development with multiple team members? Your git log starts looking like my headphone cables after a week in my pocket.

I learned this the hard way when I had to track down a bug that was introduced three weeks ago. Diving into our commit history felt like solving a puzzle where half the pieces were merge commits that added no real value.

The Game-Changing Alternative: Meet Git Pull Rebase

Everything changed when a senior developer introduced me to git pull --rebase. It was like discovering that my Swiss Army knife had a hidden blade I never knew about.

Instead of creating those pesky merge commits, git pull --rebase does something clever: it temporarily sets aside your local changes, pulls in the remote updates, and then replays your work on top. The result? A clean, linear history that actually tells a story.

But What About Merge Conflicts?

Now, I know what you're thinking: "What happens when things go wrong?" Trust me, merge conflicts can still happen - they're an unavoidable part of collaborative development. The difference is that with rebase, you're dealing with them in a more controlled way.

If you encounter conflicts, Git will pause the rebase and let you resolve them one commit at a time. Feeling overwhelmed? No worries - git rebase --abortis your escape hatch, bringing you back to where you started. It's like having an "undo" button for when things get too messy.

Making the Switch

Switching to git pull --rebase isn't just about keeping your commit history clean - it's about respecting your future self and your teammates. A clear, linear history makes code reviews more meaningful, bug tracking more manageable, and your entire development workflow more professional.

Remember: good code tells you how; great code tells you why. The same applies to your commit history. Why settle for a tangled web of merge commits when you can have a clear, purposeful narrative of your project's evolution?

Next time Git tells you that you're behind the remote branch, take a breath and reach for git pull --rebase. Your future self will thank you.

Have you tried using git pull --rebase? I'd love to hear about your experiences in the comments below!

Comments

[Gaël Jourdan-Weil]

After years of using git pull --rebase, I've now moved to git pull --ff-only so that I'm more aware of changes pushed on the remote in the meantime and then I do git rebase.

Also, you should probably mention that the pull behaviour can be configured in the .gitconfig so that you don't have to think about it. For instance:

[pull]
    ff = only