If you want to keep the individual commits rather than squash the into a single commit. This is useful if the author of the PR actually wrote good commits that you don't want to make into a single commit. I'm also thinking of the case where a squash could turn a series of commits into a single commit with a massive amount of changes that is harder to grok when going back historically.
Yes -- a merge merges one branch into another, and creates a merge commit while doing so.
A rebase rewrites history, as if the PR had been written on master directly. There is no merge commit and no evidence of a previous branch. Some people prefer rebasing over merging because it gives you a linear commit history.
This is not correct. What you're describing is two different styles of merging: fast-forward and no fast-forward, as indicated by the `--no-ff` and `--ff-only` flags provided to `git-merge`
`git-rebase` will rewrite the history of the current branch. In this case, github will rewrite the history of the branch that you would like to merge such that the base commit (hence the name "rebase") or the commit that was branched off of is the latest commit on the default branch (usually master)
Then when you merge it, you'll get a merge commit or not depending on whether or not you do a fast-forward merge
Notably, there is as an alternative to this node terminal btc client.
electrum -g [text | stdio]
The terminal interfaces could use more testing to say the least, but Electrum has been around since 2011. It's written in Python and includes support for CLI based multisignature transactions [1], raw transactions, proxies, and server selection. It was recently added to the Debian official repos.
It's actively used in ecommerce [2], and we've even heard on #electrum freenode of at least one Bitcoin exchange using it on the backend.
Electrum uses a deterministic mnemonic address generation system (soon to be BIP0032 compatible) and the Stratum protocol, which involves running a gateway daemon [3] and bitcoind on the backend, to tackle the large size of the blockchain and rather unwieldy individualized address generation scheme in use by Bitcoin-QT.
So the company who owns the rights to it can make a nice chunk of change off new book purchases (especially the purchases made by the buzz from the movie).
I have been waiting to see this company die and I hope the end is near. They may try and save it with virtual currency gambling as their next con on the human brain but it is inevitable.
