In addition, the master branch has two new commits (F and G) committed by other developers after the branching.Īt this point, a question will arise - How would you like the tree of commit history of the master branch to look like? A-B-C user / D-E-F-G masterĪs you can see, the user branch has produced 3 additional commits (A, B, and C). Let me explain.Īssuming that a user has branched from the master at some point, e.g. When users decide to merge their local repository back to the master branch, problems might arise. Users can also commit or revert to/from the local repository. Merge a branch to master git code#Once a git repository is cloned, users can add, remove, or modify the code locally. Git is a distributed system in other words, it allows users not only to check out a repository but instead, clone it entirely to their local machines. If you do already have it checked out, you can leave off the last argument of the branch name.Before getting to the process itself, let’s first take a few seconds to explain the problem. Note the rebase command above will work even if you don't currently have feature checked out. Merge a branch to master git update## If you want to update a PR, or even just backup your commits in case your machine dies So to update your feature branch with the latest master, you can do this as often as you like (but perhaps at least once per day): git fetch Note that in general, I rarely ever pull in favor of explicit fetching. Meant that you rebased (replayed) all of your commits (which included new commits on master too) onto the old version of your branch, and then pushed that out. Merge a branch to master git series#The series of commands you used which enabled you to skip the force push: git pull -rebase (Side note: you should rarely, if ever, force push shared branches such as master.) When you use a rebase workflow, you need to force push your personal feature branches afterwards. The solution, which you've already discovered from the comments and your updated question, can be summarized as: This rewrote not only your commit, but also the new commits you had from master which weren't yet on your old copy of your feature branch. The reason this happened is because you rebased your new (correct) version of your feature branch on top of the old (out of date) version of it. I feel like github has issues.and it's should do diff based on content rather than commits. > git push -f origin feature // this is important otherwise you will see error and it will ask to do `git pull -rebase origin feature` which will cause master changes to appear in the diff. > git rebase origin/master // you can do just master to rebase against local Whereas same set of steps except for rebase, if i do merge then, it doesn't show in PR diff.įinally after going over few more posts, here is what works and doesn't result master changes to pop-up in PR (w/ rebase option) > git checkout master This set-up is adding master changes in the PR as diff and commit-id is changed in feature branch as well (expected due to rebase). > git push origin feature // fails as it complains HEAD being different from remote feature branch due to earlier rebase > // made some changes & commit on master Is there any way to achieve this in github? other than just creating a new feature branch and creating new PR and abandoning old one. So, essentially i tried rebasing/merge both separately to see how it goes and I always end up with additional commits as changes in my PR diff and not just my changes. Now more changes have been merged into Master and I need to consume those changes to fix the review comments (mainly some utilities usage and libs). I have a master (default) branch, then i created a feature branch to make changes and raised a PR against it. I have tried few things like rebasing/merge but whatever i have tried always comes into the PR diff.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |