git checkout custom_branch && git rebase master
This will update custom_branch with changes from master branch.
Don't forget to make sure master is up to date first. git pull
This is also possible with git checkout custom_branch && git merge master
For an explanation on why the first one is (probably) what you should be using: When do you use git rebase instead of git merge? Answer from tehp on Stack Overflow
git checkout custom_branch && git rebase master
This will update custom_branch with changes from master branch.
Don't forget to make sure master is up to date first. git pull
This is also possible with git checkout custom_branch && git merge master
For an explanation on why the first one is (probably) what you should be using: When do you use git rebase instead of git merge?
git switch custom_branch # switch current working environment to custom_branch
git merge master # merge master branch into custom_branch
This will update your current branch with the changes from your local master branch, the state of which will be that of when you last pulled while on that branch.
I think this is what you are looking for: git merge origin master
How to Merge Master into a Feature Branch
Is it wrong to merge master into a branch i.e. ideally should you use rebase instead?
What does it mean to merge master into feature branch?
You’re being asked to make sure that your feature branch is up to date with master. New changes may have been made since you created the branch, and you might run into a nasty merge if you don’t integrate them into your branch beforehand.
You can do something like git pull origin master while checked out on your branch to do this.
Merging your branch into main after many other branches have been merged into it
What is creating a branch in Git?
What's the difference between `git merge` and `git rebase`?
How do I create a new branch in Git?
How I would do this
git checkout master
git pull origin master
git merge test
git push origin master
If I have a local branch from a remote one, I don't feel comfortable with merging other branches than this one with the remote. Also I would not push my changes, until I'm happy with what I want to push and also I wouldn't push things at all, that are only for me and my local repository. In your description it seems, that test is only for you? So no reason to publish it.
git always tries to respect yours and others changes, and so will --rebase. I don't think I can explain it appropriately, so have a look at the Git book - Rebasing or git-ready: Intro into rebasing for a little description. It's a quite cool feature
This is a very practical question, but all the answers above are not practical.
Like
git checkout master
git pull origin master
git merge test
git push origin master
This approach has two issues:
It's unsafe, because we don't know if there are any conflicts between test branch and master branch.
It would "squeeze" all test commits into one merge commit on master; that is to say on master branch, we can't see the all change logs of test branch.
So, when we suspect there would some conflicts, we can have following git operations:
git checkout test
git pull
git checkout master
git pull
git merge --no-ff --no-commit test
Test merge before commit, avoid a fast-forward commit by --no-ff,
If conflict is encountered, we can run git status to check details about the conflicts and try to solve
git status
Once we solve the conflicts, or if there is no conflict, we commit and push them
git commit -m 'merge test branch'
git push
But this way will lose the changes history logged in test branch, and it would make master branch to be hard for other developers to understand the history of the project.
So the best method is we have to use rebase instead of merge (suppose, when in this time, we have solved the branch conflicts).
Following is one simple sample, for advanced operations, please refer to http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Rebasing
git checkout master
git pull
git checkout test
git pull
git rebase -i master
git checkout master
git merge test
Yep, when you have uppers done, all the Test branch's commits will be moved onto the head of Master branch. The major benefit of rebasing is that you get a linear and much cleaner project history.
The only thing you need to avoid is: never use rebase on public branch, like master branch.
Never do operations like the following:
git checkout master
git rebase -i test
Details for https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing/the-golden-rule-of-rebasing
appendix:
- if you are not sure about rebasing operations, please refer to: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Rebasing
I need advice on how to merge master into a feature branch.
I began working on a new feature last year, and then was pulled away to other things. Master had substantially changed, so I wanted to merge it back into the feature branch, because I can't keep working on the feature until those changes are incorporated into that branch.
I tried this in Github, but I could only merge into master, even when I selected merge into the feature branch. I finally just merged into master and manually updated the changes on the feature branch (which had been overwritten) through cut-and-paste on the feature branch. But this seems like a common task, and I don't want to have to do that again if I can help it.
Thanks in advance for any help; I did consult the Git book, but I couldn't find anything specific about this task.