I have a project on GitHub, and I forked it to a second repository.
There is still work done on the repo that I forked from, but the changes I make to the first repo should also be applied to the forked one.
How can I push a pull request to both of them at the same time? Or is that impossible to do in a simple way?
If it is, is there a simple alternative solution?
No, GitHub pull requests only target a single repository.
Pull requests are only relevant when you are communicating with other people. Since both repositories are yours, you can just execute a git pull or git merge command on your local machine to merge whatever branches you want to merge. Then use git push to push the changes up to GitHub if you want.
Also, I recommend that you simplify this setup and just use a single GitHub repository with multiple branches.
Related
I was trying to compare changes I made to a forked repo.
To make this real, here is the example:
I forked https://github.com/springframeworkguru/sfg-di as https://github.com/steranka/udemy-sfg-di.
I got a local copy of the (forked) repo git clone git#github.com:steranka/udemy-sfg-di.git
I changed to the branch I wanted to work on git checkout property-source.
Made changes and committed the changes (to my local repo).
Push my changes to my fork so the changes can be compared to the original repo. git push
Now I want to compare my changes to the equivalent branch on the original repo.
The origin and upstream are set to:
origin: git#github.com:steranka/udemy-sfg-di.git
upstream: git#github.com:springframeworkguru/sfg-di.git
Searching for solution
My searches indicated that there was not a built in way to do this using the git CLI, nor the github website.
What I did find was:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/66613981/3281336. Basically do the compares via local repo.
How to compare a local Git branch with its remote branch - How to compare local vs remote branch. Later, I learned this is basically what a forked repo is... Just another remote.
General info about forks (from GitHub.com) https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/about-forks
https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/proposing-changes-to-your-work-with-pull-requests/about-comparing-branches-in-pull-requests - The GitHub.com docs indicate that this is doable if you create a pull request. This is not what I want to do.
My question
How do you do this? I ran across gh-cli which might do it.
Can this be done via the github.com web interface? If so, how?
Append /compare to the URL of your repo. Example (try it):
https://github.com/mattneub/amperfy/compare
That's a public fork of a public upstream. You can select two branches, possibly at the two different repos, to see the diff.
I've selected the answer from Matt because that is the answer I was looking for. But another possible solution is based on #torek's answer.
The solution is to pull the upstream repo's branch that you want to compare locally and then do normal git diff commands. The result is that the compares are done via my local repo.
The steps to do this are:
Setup the pointers to the upstream (the repo you forked)
Get the upstream source and put it into your local repo
Compare the upstream source's (local copy) to your code.
The code commands to do this are:
git remote add upstream git#github.com:springframeworkguru/sfg-di.git
git fetch upstream property-source
git diff upstream/property-source..
This turned out to be simpler than I expected.
One benefit of this approach over the GITHUB web ui is I could compare my code changes without pushing my code to the github.
I'd like to know how to proceed in GitHub where I could to be able to get the updates from the original repo but prevent opening a PR after each time I push a change made by myself?
The concept I want to apply this is to use a blog template for my GitHub pages. I'd like to get the feature for the future if the contributors would make any but at the same time, I'd like to prevent pushing anything to the original repo as a PR since those commits wouldn't include anything related to making a contribution to the project.
PRs aren't generated automatically, you need to explicitly create them from a branch.
You can fork a repo and work on it, and when needed, fetch and rebase from the original repo you forked from. As long as you don't explicitly use this repo to create PRs on the original repo, you should be fine.
EDIT - Adding some details as per the last comment:
Assume there's a repo called something owned by someone. You can start off by forking it to youruser using the GitHub UI. Then you can clone your fork and work on it:
git clone https://github.com/youruser/something.git
In order to get the recent changes from the original someone/something repo, you need to set it up as a remote. By convention you'd call this remote your "upstream", but you can really give it any name you choose:
git remote add upstream https://github.com/someone/something.git
Once you've added it as a remote, you can fetch from it and rebase on top of it:
git fetch upstream && git rebase upstream/main
(note that using the main branch is just an example. You can of course rebase on top of any branch in the remote repo)
I think it's not possible because when you clone or fork that repo, from that time, you start to add your own content to it since it's your personal blog. So you cannot keep getting the features from main repo. Maybe you can try rebase but I'm not sure if it works for this case. Or you can add those features to your repo by your own whenever you need them.
So i have the following problem:
Back when i started programming, i FORKED a repository (using github for windows) for a browser-game. For some time now, i made stuff, did git commit and issued a pull request using the webpage.
The original author did authorize my pull request and my changes went live.
Recently, i have become an "official" author on the original repository.
So i dont want to work on my "fork" any longer but instead dev on the original.
Using github for windows, i decided to "clone" the original repo.
My github now shows my forked (AncientSion/FieryVoid) repository and the original (Aatu/FieryVoid).
Now what i would like to do is somehow "merge" my forked repo into my local clone of the original repo and from there commit to the master repo directly, that way deploying my local, not yet commited changes from my fork to the live version while at the same time getting rid of fork repository.
However, i have no idea if that works and if it does, how.
Can someone please advise ?
I don't think that the Github for Windows interface supports this, but this can definitely be done via the git bash console. This is untested, but the steps ought to be correct, since I've done something similar (identical, in fact) before. This assumes that your clone, AncientSion/FieryVoid, is up-to-date with Aatu/FieryVoid, which can be done with a pull followed by a merge, or, to avoid merge commits, with a git pull --rebase. So now you have AncientSion/FieryVoid and Aatu/FieryVoid, both present locally, with AncientSion/FieryVoid ahead of Aatu/FieryVoid by a few commits. What you need to do is pull in those commits into Aatu/FieryVoid by running the following:
cd path/to/local/clone/of/Aatu/FieryVoid
git remote add local_pull path/to/local/clone/of/AncientSion/FieryVoid
git pull local_pull master
git push origin master
Couple of assumptions:
You were working on the master branch of AncientSion/FieryVoid. If not, replace master in line 3 with your branch name.
origin is a remote that tracks the online repo Aatu/FieryVoid
I've made multiple commits to my local repository and now I intend to do pull request to submit these changes over to the source/master.
When I do a pull request, it automatically includes all of my commits. I couldn't locate a way to submit each commit in its own pull request. Could someone please give some pointer on how to do this on GitHub.
Update
To clarify on this question, I forked a new local repo from upstream/master. Then, in my noobie-ness, I made new files in my local master itself without branching repo out first. So, effectively, my question is with these changes committed to local master repo, is there a way to raise pull requests for each new file one by one, and not for all of them in one go.
Many Thanks.
I'm not sure if there is a better way in GitHub, but in general, you can create a new branch for each pull request, cherry-picking the commits you want for each request.
The new branches should preferably be based on upstream master to make the merge painless.
Using command line git, using origin as your own github remote repo, upstream is the upstream remote:
git checkout -b {my_pull_request_feature_branch} upstream/master
git cherry-pick {sha1_of_first_commit_for_feature_X} [sha1_of_another_commit_for_feature_X] ...
git push origin {my_pull_request_feature_branch}
Repeat for each pull request.
When you do a pull request on GitHub you can then choose which branch you want to send in your request.
A commit does not stand on its own, it always links to the full previous history. So if you ask to pull commit B which depends on your commit A, then you are also asking to pull A, because your work in B depends on it.
If you want to submit multiple independent pull requests, you should make sure that those commits are completely independent of each other. So they should be on their own branches. This also makes it easier for the project maintainers to integrate your pull request, as they can just merge the branch without having to cherry-pick stuff.
Imagine situation like this:
You have a working repo in bitbucket - you were pulling revisions from another bitbucket repo in Windows 7 through TortioseHG.
Now the second project has moved to Github system and you can not pull from it anymore.
So my question is like this:
How can i somehow create new repo in bitbucket where I will pulling changes from github and from this repo i can easily pull in Tortiose HG to my working repo?
I do not want to use Github etc, so please do not advice it to me etc just help me with my question. Thank you.
The ideal solution consiste to keep local Mercurial repo, and work only with this local repo to the existing bitbucket Mercurial remote repo.
With a plugin like Hg-Git, you can at least push to and pull from a Git server repository from Mercurial, allowing you to pull from the GitHub repo to your local Mercurial repo.
From that local (Mercurial) repo, you can then work as usual with the bitbucket remote repo.
The OP adds:
It didn't work for me so i tried to transfer git repo to hg repo and from this repo pull to my working repo with changes - but it says that: abort: repository is unrelated - but I merged a lot from it. Any help here?
That makes senses, if both repos have been developed separately, you cannot push/pull 2 (mercurial) repos one into another.
This is confirmed at the bottom of the page "Understanding Mercurial", and detailed in the blog post: "What Mercurial Can't Do: Subtree Repos".
The more practical solution would be to make one extra repository (a "parent one") with your two repos declared in it as nested repository.
It would keep both repos independent, allowing to push back to the GitHub repo from your second mercurial repo.
If you don't have to push back to GitHub, but really want to have one repo in which you merge common files, then you can look in "Merge tip from an unrelated repository with Mercurial", but that is much more complex.
I would rather:
keep both repos separate
delete from the first one the common files you need to merge in the second one.
report and merge those common files in the second one.