hello group,
I use git for some months. Given the way I work, I find myself doing a
certain sequence of git actions regularly. Although it isn't that much
work, I was wondering if there is a one-command way of doing it.
- branch _master_ contains the software version everybody uses
- I do all my
On 16/09/10 ruud said:
- I check out the master branch
- I do 'reset --hard work' so that master point to the same commit
as work does
- I check out work again to continue
Are you not losing changes to do this? Why don't you just rebase the work
stream to sync-up with the master
Hi Michael,
I forgot to mention the work branch is based on master. It is one or
more commits ahead. I only want to move the master head to the work
head.
regards, Ruud
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git
for human beings group.
To post to this
Are you the only one to work on these branches? If not, you loose the
work other have done.
-*--*--*--*-- master
\-*--*--*-- work
A reset --hard work with branches like above loose the 3 commits
made on master and simply make master to refer to the same commit than
work.
If you are alone,
On 16/09/10 ruud said:
Hi Michael,
I forgot to mention the work branch is based on master. It is one or
more commits ahead. I only want to move the master head to the work
head.
That's what merge is for. Why would you use reset?
Mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 16, 3:11 pm, Michael P. Soulier msoul...@digitaltorque.ca
wrote:
I forgot to mention the work branch is based on master. It is one or
more commits ahead. I only want to move the master head to the work
head.
That's what merge is for. Why would you use reset?
Also I should note that
thanks Mike and Konstantin,
this was exactly what I needed to hear. I only wanted a fast forward.
But as you say, that is what git merge does. A step forward on my git
path.
As I reply, the sun starts to shine and lights the complete room. Who
said that coincidence doesn't exist?
regards, Ruud
On Sep 15, 5:41 pm, Roddie Grant gitl...@myword.co.uk wrote:
I noticed several spelling errors in my post.
Namely, empty refspect should be read as empty refspec as
refspec is derived from reference specification, and instead of
you don't really understand there should have been *I* don't really
Why do you do this?
First putting all of your work only in one branch called _work_ is extremely
self limiting. What if you have to work on a critical bugfix but are already in
the middle of a new feature. I would ditch that concept and begin using topic
branches. You shouldn't have to care
Thank you, Konstantin.
Here's a brief explanation to git push [remote] :[branch] syntax:
http://progit.org/book/ch3-5.html = Deleting Remote Branches
On Sep 15, 11:49 pm, Konstantin Khomoutov khomou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 15, 5:41 pm, Roddie Grant gitl...@myword.co.uk wrote:
With a
10 matches
Mail list logo
