I might have given the impression that git rebase is cleaner, and thus better, than git merge. This is not the case; there are pros and cons for each method.
git rebase rewrites, or alters, the existing history of the repository by trying to replicate changes on the sub-branch at the end of the main branch. This makes the history look cleaner and more linear, but loses the context of when and where changes are integrated together – we lose the information that social-login/twitter was originally branched off from social-login/main.
So, I'd advise using git rebase for feature/bug-fix branches. This allows you to commit small and often, making work-in-progress (WIP) commits, without having to care too much about ...
