On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:40 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Joe Abbate <j...@freedomcircle.com> writes: > > No, it doesn't trash anything. The branch is just an additional > > "pointer" to 'master' (at that point in time). I recommend taking a > > look at this: > > > http://progit.org/book/ch3-5.html > > Yes, I was reading exactly that before posting. It talks about pushing > a branch you've created locally, and it talks about what happens when > others pull that down, and it's about as clear as mud w/r/t how the > original pusher sees the remote branch. What I want is to end up > with my local branch tracking the remote branch in the same way as if > I'd not been the branch creator. Preferably without having to do > anything as ugly as delete the branch, or re-clone, or manually hack > config files. This has got to be a use case that the git authors > have heard of before... > I have done this quite a few times on GitHub and has never barfed on me in any surprising way: # make sure local master is up-to-date with origin/master, and then do git checkout master git checkout -b new_branch git push origin new_branch >From here on I work as if that new_branch was handed to me from the origin. I believe this also takes care of setting up the .git/config file properly. Just in case it is needed: to delete a branch on remote, just do git push origin :new_branch It will keep your local branch (if you have it), but will nuke the remote branch. Regards, PS: Play a bit on GitHub -- Gurjeet Singh EnterpriseDB Corporation The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
