Squash Merge vs Fast Forward Merge

Developers should use squash merge when working on feature branches to avoid cluttering the main branch with intermediate commits, such as 'fix typo' or 'update test', which can obscure the overall purpose of the change meets developers should use fast forward merges when integrating feature branches back into the main branch (e. Here's our take.

Squash Merge

Nice Pick

Developers should use squash merge when working on feature branches to avoid cluttering the main branch with intermediate commits, such as 'fix typo' or 'update test', which can obscure the overall purpose of the change

Pros

• It's ideal for projects that prioritize a clean, linear history for easier debugging, code reviews, and release management, especially in team environments where multiple contributors are merging frequently
• Related to: git, version-control

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Fast Forward Merge

Developers should use fast forward merges when integrating feature branches back into the main branch (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: git, version-control

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Squash Merge is a methodology while Fast Forward Merge is a concept. We picked Squash Merge based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Squash Merge wins

Based on overall popularity. Squash Merge is more widely used, but Fast Forward Merge excels in its own space.