git rebase - Git: rebasing a branch -

I am trying to create a feeling of rebooting in the guitar and there is a question whether it is good to use ribing in it. Scenario:

I have a branch named 'Feature' which has been removed from the second branch called 'Development'. I have made many commitments in the 'facility' but have not merged with 'development' so far as this facility is still being developed, nor has the commission been pushed into a remote repository in the 'feature'.

If I now check 'Development' to make some improvements, should it be resized in the 'Feature' branch so that 'Development' is in sync with the facility? I will rebus' feature 'on' development '(assuming, of course, this' Feature 'is a local branch)

In the merger feature,' development 'will create a redundant merge commit. But rebasing integrates all the changes from the master and before that 'feature' is ready to merge with 'develop', you can solve all the struggles before that.

But I like a clean, readable history. What I often do is that when I end up with this feature, then I rebase , and then I Merge --no-ff In this way, the history still clearly shows that there is a feature branch:

  - * - * - - - - - - - - - This thing is that I want to resolve the struggle "continuously" whenever there is a conflict, then I am about it. Want to know quick , So before solving it you can solve it (consistent with the reasons for continuous integration). If I follow the strategy that uses constant merging, then I have a  lot  merge commitment. With constant disputes, I can escape from them.  
 An optional strategy that lets you use merge, but without merged actions - you can reuse GIT:  
  git config - -Global re rerere.enabled True   
, you can merge intermediate, resolve disputes, and then reset the merge comma. Again feature feature will remember the conflict solution while making the last merger of the 'Facilitation' branch.