- #Git rebase on another branch update#
- #Git rebase on another branch code#
- #Git rebase on another branch series#
This is really confusing if you know you’ve pulled all the changes already. If you rebase pushed commits, Sourcetree will tell you that you have changes to pull down after you’ve finished the rebase. This can lead to dangerous and confusing situations. I said it above, but it bears repeating: never rebase commits that have already been pushed. But even if you do make a mistake here, you can still reset your repository as long as you don’t push the changes. Proceed thoughtfully in this situation, and don’t rush through it. If you choose mine, you’ll lose all the changes made to that file after the deleted commit. In this case, mine refers to the changeset just prior to the commit you deleted, and theirs refers to the changeset just after the commit you deleted. Git won’t know which version of that file to replay the other commits on top of, so it has to ask you: mine or theirs? Let’s also say one of those subsequent commits affects a file that was changed as part of the commit you deleted. Let’s say you’ve deleted a commit, and Git is now replaying subsequent commits. Avoiding confusion during interactive rebase “mine” vs. Just drag and drop them in Sourcetree’s “Reorder and amend” window. Whether to save yourself from reprimand or to group related commits together for ease-of-grokking, reordering commits is easy. I’ve also seen commit histories where commits for feature X were scattered around and interleaved with commits for feature Y, making it hard to get a sense where feature X is at in its development. Once upon a time, I got into trouble because the commit history of a repository clearly showed that I was working on feature Y before feature X, contrary to the project plan.
#Git rebase on another branch update#
In fact, you really ought to update the commit message in such cases so that it’s clear to everyone what the commit now contains.
Rewording commit messages is also useful after you’ve added staged changes to an existing commit. A window will pop into view where you can tweak or completely replace the commit message. Rewording commit messages lets you tell the story in a way that your colleagues (and your future self) will be able to make sense of.ĭouble-click on the “Description” column in the interactive rebase screen. When you’re in the middle of solving a problem, you don’t know how the whole story will read. When rebasing continues, it will drop back out to Sourcetree, allowing you to do whatever the heck you want before continuing on. To use this feature, check the “Amend commit?” checkbox on the commit you’d like to edit. But the git commit – -amend command lets you do things like change the commit message or add staged changes to a previous commit. Or, you can use the squash with previous option by right-clicking or using the button at the bottom of the dialog. To use the squashing feature in Sourcetree, drag and drop rows on top of one another. Squashing lets you combine tiny-yet-related commits into a single, meaningful commit. Panic commits tend to be small and, taken in isolation, rather trivial.
#Git rebase on another branch series#
Squashing is a nice way to tidy up after a series of “panic commits” – when you write a line of code, then are overcome by fear of a sudden widespread power shortage resulting in the loss of your work. The syntax means "the last known state of feature1 before the rebase" and requires reflogging to be enabled (the default for non-bare repositories).From there, you’ll have the chance to rewrite your repository’s history with the help of a few operations. This will rebase all commits of feature2 that follow the old head of feature1 (i.e. The solution is to use git rebase -onto after rebasing the first branch.
#Git rebase on another branch code#
In the worst case you might mess up your code with unnecessary conflicts. Depending on the complexity of your branches and the number of commits this might be at least tedious to solve using git rebase -skip to skip the right commits. The commits D, E, F and D', E', F' will get you into trouble. So you start rebasing feature1 on master: $ git rebase master feature1Īnd the result looks like this: master -A-B-Cĭoing another plain rebase of feature2 on feature1 might be problematic, because they share a similar, but not the same history. Sooner or later you might also run into situations where you want to rebase a branch that itself has child branches. Git encourages you to use branches and depending on your workflow you might get pretty complex commit histories.
0 kommentar(er)
