Use git rebase because it is easier to revert changes?

Question

I wonder how git rebase helps push back changes. I don’t understand why rebase is easier than merging to fix changes.

Update 1:

By returning a change, I mean by returning a previous version of the wizard.

• Master v1
• Master v2
• Master v3
• Master v4
• Master v5

At this moment I want to return to Master v4, for example.

Update 2:

When I mean help, I don't mean that you are returning with rebase or merge.

I’d better explain what my colleague said:

For example, you have this log:

• Commit Time 1: master originally [tag-x]
• Commit time 2: branch afrom the master
• Commit time 3: branch bfrom the master
• Fixation time 4: random fixation on a branch a
• 5: b
• 6: a master merge [tag-a]
• 7: b master merge [tag-b]

, , . , , , [tag-a], b. , b, ( ) a. , git...

[tag-a], , master, , [tag-a], , , .

Answer 1

- , "" ( , "git " ), . , , veeeery.

Answer 2

, , , , . git revert, git reset.

Revert , , . Reset .

git revert , v5, , , git reset --hard v4, commit v5 .

. , , git reset --hard, , v5. , , v5, ( git revert) .

git revert git reset - git.

Edit:

Hm, , ... , , rebase, merge .

, Dmitriy M , : , , , , , , , (-) , reset , .

, , , - master, , Reset, , , merge --no-ff, , ( - " XXX master" ) Reset master, , feature-a master, , " - a master", , 87db280, git reset 87db280^, git reset 87db280~1.

Answer 3

Rebase ( ). .