I would like to know,is there any option in VSTS or how to review the changes before pushing the code into VSTS git. Please help here.
Without sharing the code by pushing it to VSTS there is no way other people can look at it. VSTS however does have build in pull requests. This allows you to push your code as a separate branch and then have formal review process before accepting the merge of your changes.
You can find more info in the documentation: Review code with pull requests
You can use below commands to review the changes before pushing:
First, before reviewing the changes in your local repo, you should make sure all the commits from remote repo are pulled in you local repo. You can use the command git pull at first.
Then you can review the changes between your local branch (assume it’s master branch here) master and origin/master.
To review the commits which are not pushed to remote branch
git log origin/master..master --oneline
It will show the commits you made on local master branch but not push to remote repo yet.
To review the changed files between local master branch and remote master branch
git diff origin/master master
It will list the difference for each changed file by comparing master with origin/master.
Related
I am newbie using Gerrit review flow and previously had good experience in GitHub and GitLab.
But looks Gerrit review system works bit different.
So I have created one feature branch called feature/test. This branch contains one test commit and this commit has been pushed to Gerrit.
Change can be seen Gerrit with unique change id and commit.
Now the problem is, on this feature branch 3 developers will work and they need to continuously fetch each other changes with same change id.
Can someone help on this, what I need to do. because when I pulled this feature branch with one test commit then change is not visible to me at different place.
I didn't understand what you mean by "fetch each other changes WITH SAME CHANGE ID". A Change-Id is a unique number that identifies a change in Gerrit. Each change made by each developer will have different Change-Ids.
The better process to work on Gerrit is the following:
1- Update the local repository
git fetch
2- Create a work branch based on the remote branch:
git checkout -b work1 origin/feature/test
3- Make your change and commit
git add
git commit
4- Push your change to review on Gerrit:
git push origin HEAD:refs/for/feature/test
If the reviewer suggests something to do:
1- Checkout the work branch
git checkout work1
2- Fix your change and commit
git add
git commit --amend
3- Push the fix to Gerrit:
git push origin HEAD:refs/for/feature/test
All developers can work in parallel using the same process. You can also work in parallel by creating other work branches (work2, work3, etc) while is waiting for review. Avoid serializing the commits by always basing your work branches in the remote branch and not in your previous work branch.
When the feature branch is read, it can be merged in the master (main, release, or whatever it is called) branch.
The normal GitHub flow to contribute to a repo is to create a fork of the upstream, clone a local copy where you make changes, then push back up to your fork and then create a PR to have your changes merged into upstream.
But if upstream changes after that, how do you update your fork without creating a merge commit (and also without using the git CLI)?
I already know how to do this in a way that will create a merge commit or which depend on the git command line interface. This question is specifically about using the GitHub.com website or GitHub Desktop application only (no CLI).
Since this is a very common workflow it seems like there should be some simple way to do it using the GitHub GUI.
To reiterate: any answers that use the CLI or create a merge commit (e.g. this way) will not be answering this question since I'm explicitly looking for a non-CLI solution.
without a merge commit or using CLI?
Not directly with GitHub web UI alone, since it would involve rebasing your PR branch on top of upstream/master
So in short: no.
But in less short... maybe, if you really want to try it.
Rebasing through GitHub web UI is actually possible, since Sept. 2016, ...
if you are the maintainer of the original repo, wanting to integrate a PR branch
if none of the replayed commit introduces a conflict
(This differs from GitHub Desktop, which, since June 5th 2019 does support rebasing. But that is a frontend to Git CLI, like other tools provide. For example GitKraken and interactive rebase)
So a convoluted workaround would be:
to fetch, then push upstream/master to the master branch of your own fork (a CLI operation, but more on that below)
change the base branch of your current PR to master (so a PR within the same repository: your own fork), provided you haven't pushed to master.
Meaning: master in your fork represents the updated upstream/master, with upstream being the original repository that you have forked.
Since you are the owner of that repository (your fork), GitHub can then show you if you can rebase said branch to the base branch of the PR (master), but only if there is no conflict.
finally, change the base branch again, to <originalRepo>/master (which is the intended target of your PR)
The very first step is typically done through command line, but... there might be a trick to do it (update upstream master in your fork) through web UI: see "Quick Tip: Sync a Fork with the Original via GitHub’s Web UI" by Bruno Skvorc
In short, it involves:
creating a new branch from your current master (which would be at upstream/master at the time you forked the original repository)
Making a PR with that new branch and <originalRepo/master>
doing a base switch before creating the PR
That is the step which artificially forces upstream/master to be refreshed
You can the create and merge it with the “Merge Pull Request” button (and “Confirm Merge” afterwards): the merge will be trivial: no merge commit.
The end result is: your own master branch (in your fork) updated with upstream/master (the master branch of the original repository)!
You can then resume the steps I describe above, and change the base of your current PR to your own (now refreshed) master branch, and see if you can rebase it!
This is feasible with GitHub Desktop since version 1.0.7 considering the following:
If the current branch does not have any commits ahead upstream (the original repo of the fork), the new commits can be pulled without creating a new merge commit
In GitHub Desktop:
Clone your repository from File > Clone Repository
Fetch origin, which will automatically fetch the upstream as well
Go to Branches by clicking on where it says Current Branch
Click on Choose a branch to merge into <branch> at the bottom
Search for upstream/<branch>, then click Merge upstream/<branch> into <branch>
Push to origin, et voilà!
Otherwise, ff the current branch has commits ahead of the fork, then of course one has to create a merge commit or rebase and force push. For rebasing which might be more preferable, do the following:
In GItHub Desktop, go to Branch from menu, then Rebase Current Branch
Search for upstream/<branch>, then click Start Rebase
Solve any conflicts that have occurred from the rebase
Force push to origin. You will get a warning for this for obvious reasons.
For avoiding force-pushing to your work when your current branch is both ahead and behind its upstream counterpart, either create a new merge commit or:
Make a new branch based with all your changes
If needed, reset the original branch to its original state (before it diverged from the original repo)
Perform the steps from the first scenario and merge your changes into your branch.
And yes, it seems that pulling via the GitHub website from the original repo without creating a pull request and merge commit is not possible at this moment.
Demo GIF for first scenario: https://imgur.com/a/8wci2yf
Some GitHub issues related to this:
Add an upstream to forked repositories
multi-remote support in Desktop
Update
Note: Non-CLI based approach that might help:
Is there a way to make GitHub Desktop rebase a branch against master?
The only key here is doing a rebase, so the above answer should help.
CLI way (which is easier and using git, so it should be more comprehensive by default)
There are some practices that you should use to avoid this.
Don't work on the master branch in your fork.
$ git clone <your fork>
$ git checkout -b feature_branch
You can work in your feature_branch and then raise a Pull Request.
Once your changes are merged in the upstream master, you can pull from upstream to your origin. Since the master on upstream will have your commits sitting neatly on top of it, there won't be a merge commit.
$ git checkout master
$ git pull upstream master
$ git push origin master
In the case, where the maintainer has diverged from the master that you have in your fork, that is, it's not linear any more, you need to pull a fresh copy of it. That should not be a problem as your changes are already in the upstream.
If the master in upstream has moved ahead while you were working on your PR, then you can rebase on you feature_branch.
$ git checkout master
$ git pull upstream master
$ git push origin master
$ git checkout feature_branch
$ git rebase master
Please refer to this document for detailed reference: Fork and pull request workflow
On github, how is it possible for the owner of an original repository to pull the changes that were made in a fork by another user, without a pull request? Or anyway include the fork's changes into the original repository, maintaining information about the fork's author?
Should I clone the fork and then push it to the original repository?
Or I could copy them manually, but that wouldn't be fair at all, because the project would lose any information about the fork's changes author.
You would use the normal distributed workflow of Git here. That is, add the other repository as a second remote to your local repository, and then simply merge their changes in.
git remote add others-fork https://github.com/otheruser/fork.git
git fetch others-fork
git checkout master
git merge others-fork/master
This would merge the changes from their master into your local master. Afterwards, you can push your changes to publish their commits in your repository.
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
In git documentation says fetch doesnt merge with your working tree. So lets say I have these branches: master, jhonny and miguel. Let's say master is for the last production code release.
--------------------------------------------master
\-----------------------miguel
\---------------------------jhonny
Miguel and I have tracking of all branches in our local repo. Lets say Miguel commit and push his brach to the github repo. I want to have the miguel push localy. If I do fetch, what will happen? Does fetch just updates the remote repo reference? Origin in this case.
Vote down if you think this is duplicated. But I couldnt find the answer Im looking for yet.
Regards.
Yes, git fetch only updates the local copy of the remote repo (i.e. the remote reference) - it doesn't then merge those updates into the local branch the way git pull does.
In this sense, git fetch is quite 'safe' as there are no merge issues and all of your local branches remain untouched. For a more detailed discussion, see: What is the difference between 'git pull' and 'git fetch'?
If after a git fetch you do want to merge the remote changes with the local branch, you then need to run a git merge. This is in effect what git pull does.