It is very common that while you are working in your feature branch, your teammates continue to commit their work to master: Merging your branch into master is the most common way to do this. Suppose you have created a feature branch to work on a specific task, and want to integrate the results of your work into the main code base after you have completed and tested your feature: If previous cmd fails - run git pull -rebase to use rebase strategy.In Git, there are several ways to integrate changes from one branch into another: By default pull will use merge strategy if there's difference between remote and local branches Git pull -ff-only - to pull remote branches. git flow) - messy history is often a result of messy dev flowĮnsure everyone in the team is comfortable with git (better git-cli) Some additional advices from my experience: Very important subject! Thank you for the article! If you need me to explain it please let me know. This is a little bit tricky, see how REBASE work here. As rebase creates "new commits" than you feature branch, if you team mate has pulled his work from your /feature branch he might have conflicts when he will merge to /dev branch (MAYBE).This is not THE SOLUTION, sometimes you need to keep track of an old branch, i don't know maybe you need to see when a feature branch was started and finished/merged, it depends of your needs, you should ask yourself do i need to see this branch in my history ? is it meaningful ? YES/NO ?.Ok rebase, needs a little more steps compared to merge, but this was useful to me, i can improve tests and avoid bugs.merge, as your /feature is directly following the HEAD of dev branch, you branch will merge without creating "new merge commit" (see first GIF).rebase on top of /dev branch (for example): now /feature is updated too and ready to test.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |