Lab1 [with report]

lab1/submission1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+# The Importance of Signed Commits
+
+Signed commits are a crucial aspect of maintaining the integrity and authenticity of commits in a Git repository. By signing commits, developers can ensure that the changes made to the codebase are genuine and come from a trusted source.
+
+### Benefits of Signed Commits
+
+* __Verification of Commit Authorship:__ Signed commits allow other developers to verify the identity of the commit author, ensuring that the changes were made by a trusted individual.
+
+* __Prevention of Tampering:__ Signed commits prevent tampering with the commit history, as any changes to the commit would require re-signing with the same key.
+
+* __Improved Security:__ Signed commits provide an additional layer of security, making it more difficult for malicious actors to introduce unauthorized changes to the codebase.
+
+* __Compliance with Regulatory Requirements:__ In some industries, signed commits may be required to meet regulatory compliance standards.
+
+-----
+
+## Merge Strategies in Git
+
+### Standard Merge Strategy
+
+* Combines two branches by creating a merge commit
+* Preserves commit history and allows for easier tracking of changes
+* Explicit merge commit indicates that a merge has been invoked
+* Pros:
+  * Preserves commit history
+  * Easier tracking of changes
+  * Collaborative environments benefit from explicit merge commits
+* Cons:
+  * Can lead to a complex commit history
+
+### Squash and Merge Strategy
+
+* Squashes all commits from a feature branch into a single commit before merging
+* Simplifies commit history, making it easier to follow
+* Pros:
+  * Simplifies commit history
+  * Reduces noise in the commit history
+* Cons:
+  * Loses individual commit history of the feature branch
+
+### Rebase and Merge Strategy
+
+* Reapplies commits from a feature branch onto the base branch
+* Can be triggered by rebase events and fast-forward merges
+* Pros:
+  * Reapplies commits from a feature branch onto the base branch
+  * Can be useful for reapplying commits
+* Cons:
+  * Can lead to conflicts
+  * Loses individual commit history of the feature branch
+
+The standard merge strategy is preferred because it preserves the commit history. The explicit merge commit indicates that a merge has been invoked, making it easier for team members to understand the project's history. While the squash/rebase and merge strategy simplifies the commit history, it loses the individual commit history of the feature branch. Therefore, the standard merge strategy is the most suitable choice for collaborative environments.
+
+## Report of disabling Squash and Rebase merging
+
+![Here is the image](image.png)