This trace follows the actual state transitions behind the companion Git History as a Reproducible Change Record. It describes a common execution path; implementation details can vary, so keep the contract separate from the mechanism.
Step 1: Inspect the working tree
Git records snapshots and relationships between commits. A branch is a movable reference to a commit; creating a branch is cheap because it does not copy the repository. This model supports parallel work, review, and recovery when changes are small and their intent is clear.
Step 2: Stage one coherent change
A commit records a tree plus metadata and parent references. A merge combines histories while preserving their ancestry; a rebase reapplies commits onto a new base and changes their identities. Pull requests use these histories to make a proposed change reviewable before integration.
Step 3: Record a commit snapshot
A commit records a tree and parent relationship; a rebase creates new commit identities, while a merge records the combined ancestry.
At this point, record the state that changed and check the invariant before advancing. If the operation repeats, make clear which values persist and which are recomputed.
Step 4: Review and integrate history
Git does not automatically make a change correct or safe. Large mixed-purpose commits obscure intent, and rewriting a shared branch can disrupt collaborators. A clean history helps investigation, but preserve the original evidence when correcting a production incident.
Step 5: Recover through a known reference
A feature branch contains one implementation commit and one unrelated formatting commit. Explain how splitting the changes improves review and how rebase affects commit identifiers.
The trace is complete when the result satisfies the stated contract. Compare this model with the concrete runtime or system you are studying before making a performance claim.