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
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
Merge Branch to Master
Other - git: correct way to merge/pull commits/branches into master retaining history? | The FreeBSD Forums
Super dumb question, How to merge origin/master into my branch in one commit?
Is it wrong to merge master into a branch i.e. ideally should you use rebase instead?
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
0
I have very basic question and am very novice to GIT. Hence, my question is below.
I have "Master" as base branch where my code files and folders are. Now, I have 5 teammates, and they have created 5 branches separately to work on different folders cloning the masters. Now, my question is - I created some changes in folder xyz in my branch abc123. Now, I need to push my changes from abc123 branch and merge to Master. If I merge, then master repo will be updated with new changes. Now, my concern is that what if other teammates push their changes in to master working different folder called abc but in their cloned one in their branch there would be previous content of xyz content. will that previous content from his branch replace my updated one in master?
Not sure if this is the right place to ask this. My branch is behind origin master by many commits, I tried to git merge master to my branch earlier but my git log history now shows a bunch of other people’s commits, but I actually just wanted to keep my branch up-to-date with master in one commit only, something like “Merge branch ‘master’ into ‘some-branch’” any help is appreciated. Thanks