I have looked at many past posts without a specific response. I used git reset --hard to get me to a point in time when my code was not all jacked up. Yes I should have used a branch but I didn't. Now I have a message of HEAD is now at 0600b73 fixed error. What I would like to know is how to commit those changes, so I can push them back to Git, so they are the current head? I am not even sure if VS Code even recorded the changes. Git can be confusing so any help would be appreciated.
You haven't actually proven you have changes, HEAD is now at 0600b73 fixed error., that does not mean you have changes. That basically means that you moved the HEAD of git to a commit, generally you want it on a branch.
git status will tell you if you have things that need to be committed.
I am not even sure if VS Code even recorded the changes
VScode has some cool features around git but it doesn't actually record changes, unless you are referring to saving files. If you save the file, well it saves.
What you probably want to do is (I am assuming you actually do have changes):
confirm you have changes git status
move to a branch git checkout -b my-fix
add those changes git add . (adds all changes/also make sure you are at the root of the repo) or git add -p will let you look closely at changes and give you an interface to decide if you want to stage the change or not.
commit the changes git commit -m "Your message" or you can do a longer message with git commit -p
At this point you can merge this branch in to master, push the branch. It's up to you.
push your changes, git push origin my-fix, make a pull request and merge to master. You will then want to change to master and pull master
merge git checkout master , git merge my-fix
rebase git checkout master , git rebase my-fix
Here is some git learning material:
https://learngitbranching.js.org/
https://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-git
https://try.github.io/
https://www.atlassian.com/git
Related
I am trying to revert my latest commit on GitHub. All the information I have looked through says that there should be a revert button in the pull request but I do not see it, and cannot find it.
Is there anyway to do this on GitHub? Or could I do it terminal with a few rebase commands?
Assuming this pull request merge is a commit merge (what I would expect), then you may try the following from the Git bash:
git checkout your_branch
git revert <hash of merge commit> -m 1
git push origin your_branch
This solution assumes that you want to revert back to the branch into which the pull request merge was made. If you want to follow the incoming branch, then use -m 2 instead.
To find the SHA-1 hash of the merge commit, you may use git log, and then copy over the hash from the first commit, which should appear at the top.
Note that nuking the merge commit and then doing a force push is generally a bad idea here. The reason it is bad is because your branch is published on GitHub. This means that rewriting the history of that branch could cause problems for anyone besides you who happens to be sharing this branch.
In android studio click version control tab in the bottom. Then click log
Then your all the commits will be visible. Then right click on relvent commit and revert it.
Then commit changes and push again.
Get the hash of the commit in which you want to revert back. Then do:
git checkout 54722c31619b0662b379923d0be4b8f8f1f125c9
The long number you are seeing is the hash of that particular commit in which you want to revert back.
Then force push into the branch you want to revert back.
git push origin <your_branch_name> --force
I hope this helps. Happy coding :)
There is a certain commit I did to my Git repository which I host in GitHub. After that commit I've made several other commits, which were bad and redundant, in a second look. I thus need to revert to the certain commit / certain point in history before these bad changes.
I didn't find a button like "revert to this version" or "commit this version as the head of this branch (master)".
As you can see, I just want to make that older version the head of the master branch. How will you do that from GitHub?
Update
I emphasize: I ask on GitHub, not on git or any GUI other than GitHub.
If I understand you correctly you want a past commit as the last commit on the branch.
If so, using examples with origin and master:
Use git reset <comit_id> and then git push origin +master to push & delete all commits past the one you reset to. Notice the + sign before the branch name (master).
Note that this is irreversible (as far as I know) so take the necessary precautions.
I've had problems using git pull origin SomeBranch in that when there are conflicts, sometimes I cannot open a file in Xcode to resolve the conflict.
From my reading, although I could be wrong, I thought git fetch grabs the code but does not merge it yet like git pull does. How does this work with Xcode?
For example, on one machine on Branch1, I put in some changes.
Then on machine 2, on Branch2, I want to fetch Branch1 changes.
So I did this
git fetch origin Branch2
My output from the command line was:
*branch Branch2 -> FETCH_HEAD
What does this mean? When I go to the source file of the file that I changed, I do not see any changes made.
I thought what would happen is in Xcode, it would then show the changes of that file in that source file and that file would then be Modified. And only when I commit would it be added to the staging area so I could merge it with everything else. But maybe I am understanding it incorrectly. Thoughts? Thanks.
I thought git fetch grabs the code but does not merge it yet like git pull does.
Yes, that is correct. git merge is what updates your working directory, which is why...
When I go to the source file of the file that I changed, I do not see any changes made.
git fetch retrieves the objects that represent the changes, but does not update your working directory. That's what git merge does. Remember that git pull is basically a git fetch followed by a git merge.
fetch just updates your remote tracking branch.
This allows you to inspect what was pulled down from the server before integrating those changes with what you have locally.
You now either merge or rebase those changes to your local branch (if it exists). If it doesn't, you can simply
git checkout branch2
if it does,
git merge origin/branch2
or
git rebase origin/branch2
to skip this 2 step process, just
git pull origin branch2
which will by default merge. You can override with
git pull --rebase origin branch2
you can change your config so that pull will always rebase instead of merge.
For a Git repository, you need to save changes you’ve made and commit them to your local repository before updating changes from the shared repository.
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/recipes/xcode_help-source_control_management/UpdatingorPullingChanges/UpdatingorPullingChanges.html
I can never seem to figure out how to use git. I just do random commands and it works eventually. This is what I usually do when I want to push:
Fetch from upstream
Commit
Push to upstream
However, the above steps don't work sometimes. For example, when I do fetch from upstream, my local branch doesn't get updated.
How do I merge the remote branch into my local branch? Is there a difference between pull and fetch?
"git pull" is equivalent to "git fetch" followed by "git merge"
What you want to do is:
git commit -am "your message here"
This commits your current changes locally, and only locally. Now, assuming branch "foo":
git pull origin foo
This does a "git fetch" followed by a "git merge". Everything in this step is done to your local branch, and still has no effect on the remote branch. Depending on how your git is setup, you might need to specify the branch.
If you have a merge conflict, you will have to fix the files listed, then add them back:
git add path/to/resolved.file
When you are done, push everything you have from your local changes, to the remote server:
git push origin foo
If you pull before committing, that might cause your local branch to not be updated.
tl;dr, always commit before pulling!
Well to understand differences betwene git fetch and git pull look here.
In the simplest terms, "git pull" does a "git fetch" followed by a
"git merge".
You can do a "git fetch" at any time to update your local copy of a
remote branch. This operation never changes any of your own branches
and is safe to do without changing your working copy. I have even
heard of people running "git fetch" periodically in a cron job in the
background (although I wouldn't recommend doing this).
Working with git in eclipse might be a little bit tricky, but if you understand git basics, you should cope with it. I recommend you to read one of git tutorials, so you will be able to understand basic git operations.
The first step to learn git: Don't use egit.
Now, you are fetching and pulling from upstream. That makes me think that several people have write-access to the same repository, so we probably don't want to be doing a whole lot of merges to complicate history. It would be best to do this. I'm assuming you have already committed a changes or a set of changes to your local master branch that you want to place on the upstream repository which has been pushed to by someone else while you were making your commits.
First, we fetch the new changes but don't use them yet. This updates upstream/master to the new head of the upstream master branch.
git fetch upstream master
Now, we need to pull in these changes. This command rewrites history, and we are assuming
that you have not published your changes anywhere yet.
git rebase upstream/master master
If you have published your changes, this messier command is the one you should use (do not use both, just use this one!)
git merge upstream/master master
Now, we can push:
git push upstream master
The first two steps can be shorted to git pull --rebase and git pull for the rebase and merge versions respectively.
If you are already on the master branch, most of those second arguments are superfluous but I wrote them in for clarity. Notably, giving a second argument to git-rebase or git-merge will simply check out that branch before doing the operation. Supplying master to fetch and push is only necessary if you don't have the refs set up to automatically fetch and push master.
The company that I'm working is working with SVN but I would like to start working with git to take advantage of the light branching and stashing features (disclaimer, I'm pretty new to git). I've started with git-svn and I'm trying to figure out the ideal git-svn workflow for what I'm trying to do (and suggestions if what I'm trying to do needs tweaking).
I've read through git svn workflow - feature branches and merge and a few other posts but its still not clear how I should approach it.
How I plan to work:
I plan on having my master branch be clean from development and only used for merging/rebase/dcommit.
I would like break apart each new feature/bug into separate git branches so they can be worked on independently. Meaning, I can work on one feature for a few hours, then put it aside and work on the next issue. When I was in SVN it was a problem when I had two different features/bugs in one file because when it came time to commit, I would remember that it had both changes and temporarily take out what I didn't want to commit now - a pain.
And the are some features which are while I might want to work on now, will not be added to the main repo for some time.
After a feature is ready to be shared/tested in the main repo, I'll merge/rebase into my master branch and then dcommit to the svn-repo. I only want to have one SVN commit message for each dcommit - I want to be committing in more often with comments more specific to me and then dcommit to svn with a message for the rest of the team. I assume for this I'll either be using a git merge --squash or a git rebase --interactive for this.
The basic git flow I've envisioned is like this:
// it begins...
git svn clone <repo>
//
git checkout -b feature 1
// work commit, work commit
//
git checkout -b bug-123
// work commit, work commit
// bug-123 finished - ready to send back
// got back to master for step 5
git checkout master
// get whatever changes other devs did
git svn rebase
//
git checkout bug-123
// rebase branch so I have fewer smaller changes. not sure here..
git rebase master || git svn rebase
// Assuming I'm doing a FF rebase so my commits are just addons to the current repo
// I don't know if I rebase the master or svn repo or it doesn't matter.
// need to get my changes back to master to send off
git checkout master
// add my changes to master
git rebase bug-123 (--interactive?) || git merge --squash bug-123
// do I add a new commit message here?
// push my changes back out to the team
git dcommit
So there are a few questions:
How should I get the changes into the branch I want to commit - by rebasing the master or the svn branch
how do I get the changes back into the main branch - rebase or merge - remember, I want only one commit for each commit - unless this is going to complicate things - I really would prefer to keep my git commits separate from the SVN commits because I might start something - it's half-working, and want to commit it so I could try something else - but I don't want to commit these broken steps.
would it make sense to dcommit directly from the working branch (eg bug-123)?
how do I get the changes from bug-123 back now into feature-1? I'm assuming I'll do it via the SVN repo - meaning the changes that I added will get merged in when I do the rebase when it's time to add feature-1 to the repo - but maybe not.
I'm no expert, but these are the experiences I've made (related answer).
I think it doesn't matter. The important thing is that you rebase the latest changes from SVN into the branch you are going to dcommit from.
Let other branches receive the changes through SVN. If you want a single SVN commit from a series of git commits, squash them together first.
I think this doesn't matter either. You're going to rebase the latest changes from SVN, and need to get them linearly in front of your Git commits. If you do git svn rebase in master, and then rebase master into a feature branch, or the other way around is same-same. Afterwards you probably want to delete the branch, as it has done its work (as per SVN restrictions, you're not allowed to merge again).
Always let changes flow into other branches and repos through SVN rebasing.
Just try it out and try to get the most simple/practical workflow for you and your team. Try to keep branches short-lived (SVN won't get any notion of them anyway), and remember that the commits must always be linearized at the top of your log before you dcommit back.