I was working on a branch of my Bitbucket repo (lets call it "frontend-dev"), which has now been merged with the master branch. I would like to branch again to make further changes, without creating a new branch. How do I branch and get back onto "frontend-dev".
I am using Sourcetree to manage version control.
Normally merging to master does not close or delete the branch. If there are changes in master since the merge from "frontend-dev", you can merge back to "frontend-dev". Either way, you can then simply switch your working copy to "frontend-dev" and continue developing.
Another question discusses what to do when you have closed or deleted the branch: Restore Merged Branch in Bitbucket Repo
Related
We've just transitioned to a gitlab system. I pulled from master, created a branch, and am ready commit and request a merge. Before I commit, I want to pull changes that happened in the interim.
Question - do I switch back to the main branch to do the pull? Then switch back to the current branch? But if I do that, will it no longer of the the changes from the pull to main? And if I don't switch to the main branch, will I be committing code without the updated code?
No need to switch to master (do they call it main branch now?), just do the following command from your current branch (replace master with main if your repo is post-BLM):
git merge origin/master
On the Github desktop client, I did the following:
switch to master
pull
switch to branch
merge from master
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
I've forked a version of this
https://github.com/googlesamples/android-topeka
a few days ago.
I'm making changes to it in Android Studio. Now changes have been committed to the original project at
https://github.com/googlesamples/android-topeka
I want to merge my changes I've been making locally with that version. But at the same time I want to keep my version private?
How can I COMPARE my changes locally with the master?
Typically, your workflow in GitHub will go something like this:
git pull origin master
# work work work
git commit -m 'I made some changes to android-topeka'
git pull origin master
# resolve merge conflicts
git push origin master
The general strategy is to commit your local changes, then git pull the remote to bring in any changes which other developers might have made to the android-topeka repository since you last pulled. Once you have resolved the merge conflicts (if any), then you can fast-forward the branch on GitHub by doing a git push.
Note that origin points to https://github.com/googlesamples/android-topeka in your case. I also assume that your local branch is called master, as I only see one master branch under the android-topeka project on GitHub.
Consider two repositories, production and stage. I have a branch in production repository called stage-branch. What I am trying to achieve is to merge latest changes from stage repository into that branch.
And everything went well, I cloned my production repository I pulled stage repository and merged under stage-branch.
What is unexpected though is that the default branch in my production repository now has been replaced by the default branch of the stage repository, which was not intended. I have just committed my merge changes under stage-branch in production repository but when I push I get a notification that there is a new head in my default branch.
How can I keep or revert my default branch to the state it was before pulling and merging?
EDIT: Production repository is a fork of stage repository, is it logical that the tip is getting automatically to latest revision of the pulled repository?
When your push or pull something in Mercurial, by default everything (and not just the current active branch, as it is in e.g. Git) will be pushed/pulled. If you would only like to push or pull a specific branch, you'll have to use the -b option.
From hg help pull you'll for instance see:
-b --branch BRANCH [+] a specific branch you would like to push
So if I understand your problem correct, it sounds like you doing a hg pull -b stage-branch should be the right thing to do.
I am using github and I have the following question, I have a master branch and I created a new branch out of master by doing
Git branch {branchname"
Git checkout {branchname}.
Now I need to edit some settings file , should I edit this file from my new branch or the Master? If I edit it from the new branch, then each time I create a new branch for different projects, then I should be modifying this settings file…but at the same time if I edit it by being on master branch, then when I merge/update master branch later, then I would loose the changes. Can someone please clarify the best way to handle this? If I have to do it from Master, then how I can stash it as I never push anything from master branch.
it depends what you want. If you want the new settings to be available everywhere, you need to modify the file in master, check it in, then rebase any existing branches to get the settings.
If you only want the changes in the other branch, make them there. If you ever merge the other branch back into master, then master will then have them.