on a fast changing repo) to do a git rebase origin here. On step 3: It's probably more accurate (e.g. On step 2: For more on diffs between local and remotes, see: How to compare a local Git branch with its remote branch If you're happy with those updates, then merge: git pull Update your local repo from the remote (but don't merge): git fetchĪfter downloading the updates, let's see the differences: git diff master origin/master I thought I'd update this to show how you'd actually use this in practice. The difference between git pull, git fetch and git clone (and git rebase) - Mike PearceĪnd covers git pull, git fetch, git clone and git rebase. So, git pull -rebase will pull down the remote changes, rewind your local branch, replay your changes over the top of your current branch one by one until you're up-to-date.Īlso, git branch -a will show you exactly what’s going on with all your branches - local and remote. Your branch is now the same as before you started your changes. Git rebase saves stuff from your current branch that isn't in the upstream branch to a temporary area. Git pull pulls down from a remote and instantly merges. origin/master gets updated but master stays the same). it fetches remote updates ( refs and objects) but your local stays the same (i.e. Git fetch is similar to pull but doesn't merge. Git pull does a git fetch under the hood and then a merge. Git fetch fetches updates but does not merge them. ![]() The third copy is your local "cached" copy of a remote repository. The second copy is your working copy where you are editing and building. One copy is your own repository with your own commit history. The take away is to keep in mind that there are often at least three copies of a project on your workstation. Normally git pull does this by doing a git fetch to bring the local copy of the remote repository up to date, and then merging the changes into your own code repository and possibly your working copy. ![]() Git pull says "bring the changes in the remote repository to where I keep my own code." Git fetch is the command that says "bring my local copy of the remote repository up to date." Later when you need to send the changes to someone else, git can transfer them as a set of changes from a point in time known to the remote repository. By keeping a copy of the remote repository locally, git can figure out the changes needed even when the remote repository is not reachable. In order to support this model git maintains a local repository with your code and also an additional local repository that mirrors the state of the remote repository. ![]() It is possible to work completely disconnected and burn a CD to exchange code via git. Git was designed so that people on an unreliable link could exchange code via email, even. Also git was designed so that the client and the "server" don't need to be online at the same time. Git was designed to support a more distributed model with no need for a central repository (though you can certainly use one if you like). The assumption is that the client can always contact the server when it needs to perform an operation. There is a single repository that is the server, and several clients can fetch code from the server, work on it, then commit it back to the server. Subversion was designed and built with a client/server model. It is important to contrast the design philosophy of git with the philosophy of a more traditional source control tool like SVN.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |