​​​​​​​Which procedure does a better job of preserving a project’s history?

Merges >>> ​​​​​​​Which procedure does a better job of preserving a project’s history? >>> Using Git for Distributed Development

 

git merge preserves the full history and adds to it

============================

This answer explains itself

The code might look fine, but the results are problematic

============================

This is the purpose of a rebase

============================

You can only merge one branch at a time

============================

Other Questions Of This Category

How can you get a brief list of all git subcommands?

Revision control systems are:

Which revision control system requires a user to lock a file when it is checked out, so that other developers cannot work on it easily at the same time?

If there are two branches br1 and br2 showing all differences between them can be done with:

Which statement is true?

In Git branching is the inverse process to:

To get all patches between your current branch and the master branch, do:

What does the command git revert c87e6ae4 do?

In git the fundamental content full object that is stored, is called a:

An "ignored" file in git is one that:

When you clone a remote repository you receive:

Gerrit is: