And Thanks to you for your feed-back. On Monday, September 10, 2012 4:18:38 PM UTC-4, Patrick wrote: > > Now that I have done both methods and I confirmed that the state of the > local repo is pretty much the same, either method will work fine for me. I > have done this on my working local repo (using way 2) and even pushed it up > to the remote just to test it completely. The first method moves (renames) > the branch master to parser and then recreates and connects to the remote > master branch. The second creates the parser branch and then does a hard > reset of the local master branch to the remote master branch. If I'd have > known that git branch <new branch name> takes all current local commits > into account (which now that I think about it makes sense but I was > thinking about it from a remote point of view...) then I might have been > able to come up either process. It might have been just a matter of > creating the parser branch and then look at the histories of master and > parser. > > Just have to make sure you local is all checked in or use stash to pop it > in later. > > Thanks RubyRedRick and P Rouleau for your ideas! > > On Monday, September 10, 2012 10:31:26 AM UTC-7, Patrick wrote: >> >> ... >> > # way 1 >> 1. git branch -m master parser >> 2. git fetch origin >> 3. git branch --track master origin/master >> 4. git checkout parser >> >> # way 2 >> 1. git branch parser >> 2. git fetch >> 3. git reset --hard origin/master >> 4. git checkout parser >> ... >> >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/git-users/-/VQ7eYIknrQEJ. To post to this group, send email to git-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/git-users?hl=en.
