This is the first time I am using Git Hub. So please co-operate with me.
I am working on an iOS project with another developer. Now since we are working on 2 different functionalities, I thought making separate branches for each developer is good way. So my plan in to follow below steps
Create a local branches named functionality1 from the current one using
git checkout -b functionality1
Commit my code in functionality1 branch
Push that branch to the remote using
git push origin functionality1
This will add my branch to remote server. I need branches on remote because I can work from anywhere.
I will merge it in Master branch using
git checkout master
git merge functionality1
Now functionality1 is merged into master branch (provided no conflicts occurred)
Other developer will follow same steps.
We don't want to delete the branches yet.
Now once both branches are merged into master, how can each developer will get the merged code from master branch into their respective branches (functionality1 & functionality2) & then continue on working on same branch (functionality1 & functionality2)?
IMHO you shouldn't unless you really need the new functionality. Because by merging e.g. master back into functionality1 you make it dependend upon the other feature branch. A good read is the gitworkflows(7) man-page.
Related
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
We have a Master branch and a Develop branch for our repo. We are supposed to check-in (commit, push) to our Develop branch and then merge that with our Master branch. Then a build is run for the Master branch. I pushed my changes directly to Master (then tagged it), putting Master multiple commits ahead of Develop and now want to bring Develop in sync with Master. What is the best practice to do this? I use GitExtensions and Visual Studio 2015 (am ok doing the operation in either). Do I 'push' Master into Develop or do a check out of remote branch Master and merge with my local?
I would find it most clear to just check out both branches locally, merge in the changes from your local master to your local develop. Then push your local develop to remote.
The workflow I use works something like this in the scenario you describe:
Switch to Develop branch
Fetch All
Choose last (newest) commit in Master, right click => Rebase current branch on => (commit ID)
If Rebase works successfully you're done. If not, you may need to resolve conflicts or cancel the Rebase and merge from scratch.
The reason for using Rebase is that it maintains a single line of commits thus helping keep everything clear.
For more info on the difference between rebase and merge see:
https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing
Our current stash repository has a Master and Develop branch.
Anytime if a developer is working on a story a developer creates a branch and once the coding is done a pull request is raised to merge to develop.
So far it has been good but when two developers are working on different feature branches on a same Repository if a developer merges his changes to develop and other one is still working on, there are issues like merge conflicts and we don't want the two different feature branches to be released together.
I know this is not an issue but we want to avoid release multiple feature branches at a time.
Any thoughts on this on what are the best practices.
I would suggest to create tags after you have merge to "develop" branch. There is no harm if you wish to release code from "master" branch using tags as well.
Honestly speaking there aren't any hard lines drawn on how you wish to release your code from Git hosted repos?
You may like to follow this sequence
rebase the feature brnach of second dev from develop branch to get changes of dev1 and avoid merge conflicts
git checkout feature_branch2
git rebase develop
merge feature-branch2 to develop branch
git checkout develop
git merge feature_branch2
tag the version you wish to release
git checkout provide_version_you_wish_to_release
git tag tag_name
The best practice is that the 2nd developer should first rebase his feature branch from "develop" branch and then merge his changes back to "develop" branch by creating a pull request.
If you don't wish to release changes from two feature branches simultaneously, you can create tags on the "develop" branch after a merge is successful and release code using these tags.
Hope this helps!
I am new to managing code revisions and need guidance on how to merge to code sets. I have a MASTER branch with my latest UI and I have a branch called "Feature-A" with lots of Django additions + template additions to the previous UI files.
Since I am new to Github, I want to take the safest approach incase I need to revert mistakes. Should I make a new brach of master and merge Feature-A into that branch or should I merge Feature-A directly into the MASTER?
Since you're new, I would say the best approach would be to create another branch (clone of master branch) and then merge feature A into that, and see if it works. If not, keep testing feature A to make it compatible. If it works, great! Just remove that extra branch and merge feature A into the master.
I.e.,
git checkout master
Then, create a new branch (git checkout -b 'featuretest')
Now, git branch shows
* master
* featureA
* featuretest
Then, do git checkout featuretest, and git merge featureA to merge it.
If the feature works, great! Remove the branch (git checkout master; git branch -d featuretest)
and do it for real (git merge featureA)
If the feature doesn't work, go back to the feature branch (git checkout feature) and keep testing.
I am planning to add my iOS project to GIT hub and I am new to the GIT branching and taging.
Please suggest a simple and good branching structure for development and production.
If i create one branch for development and one for production(master), is it possible to create sub branches under development?
Help is highly appreciable.
You can branch from any commit in git. All branches are equal. Why don't you try it out?
SCM organisation tends to be project-specific, so, whatever works for you is good. Your clients should never see your entire repository anyway.
First of all, branching in Git is unlike branching in Subversion or any other Central VCS.
Guess you need one major branch, and from there you can make all possible branches you need. Just remember to merge what you want to keep.
E.g. you branch for production (guess solving problems (branch even per problem)) and you branch for development (sub branching again if needed). And later on you can combine (merge) the changes from the production branch back to the master and all the stuff from your development branches that you want to keep.
But there is no best way - that depends on your use cases.
I usually branch per problem (production / issues) and merge it back if solved.
The development branch(es) I only add when needed (f.i. before acceptance testing).
YMMV.
Assume you have a tarball named ios_project.tar.gz with your initial work. You can place it under git revision control as
follows.
$ tar xzf ios_project.tar.gz
$ cd project
$ git init
Git will reply
Initialized empty Git repository in .git/
You've now initialized the working directory--you may notice a new directory created, named ".git".
Let the master be as is. I would recommend you to create two branches one for development and another for production. Do all your code modifications which you are unsure of in your development branch, and when you are sure about your work, push it to the production branch and apply a tag on it so that it is each to track the production line at a later stage.
In addition to this if you would like to share it with others, then have the repository as a shared directory. And clone it on any other development machine, create a local branch tracking the development branch on this machine, do changes, push to origin.
Following set of commands would be useful at a very basic level:
git clone git#repository_path_on_network/folder_name
git branch usrname_activity_dev --track origin/branch_in_repository
git checkout usrname_activity_dev
git add filenames
git commit -m "comments"
git push origin usrname_activity_dev:branch_in_repository
git checkout local_production_branch
git rebase usrname_activity_dev
git push origin local_production_branch:production_branch_on_repo
git tag tag_name
git push origin local_production_branch:production_branch_on_repo --tags
These are very basic commands. I would suggest you to further go through the internet. You will find a lots of commands according to every situation you are in.
Take a look at Git flow. Python scripts to help apply this are available here.