Which statement best describes the relationship between commits and branches in Git?

Which statement best describes the relationship between commits and branches in Git?

• A. A branch is a pointer to a commit, and commits are immutable.
• B. A commit is a pointer to a branch
• C. Branches exist only in remote repositories
• D. Commits store branch names

Answer: (A)

In Git, history is built from commits and branches working as references. A branch is a movable pointer to a specific commit, while commits themselves are immutable objects that store the snapshot of changes plus metadata and a link to their parent(s). When you make a new commit, Git creates a new commit object and moves the current branch pointer to that new commit. Because commits are immutable, you don’t modify an existing commit; you create new ones or rewrite history, while the old commit remains unchanged. This setup allows multiple branches to share the same commit and then diverge as they each advance with new commits. Branches exist both locally and remotely; they’re not confined to remote repositories. Commits don’t store branch names; they hold the actual changes, metadata, and pointers to parent commits.

In Git, history is built from commits and branches working as references. A branch is a movable pointer to a specific commit, while commits themselves are immutable objects that store the snapshot of changes plus metadata and a link to their parent(s). When you make a new commit, Git creates a new commit object and moves the current branch pointer to that new commit. Because commits are immutable, you don’t modify an existing commit; you create new ones or rewrite history, while the old commit remains unchanged. This setup allows multiple branches to share the same commit and then diverge as they each advance with new commits. Branches exist both locally and remotely; they’re not confined to remote repositories. Commits don’t store branch names; they hold the actual changes, metadata, and pointers to parent commits.