rebase

问题 I'm in the middle of a rebase of my master to a stage branch git checkout stage git rebase master At some time I deleted two files then modified the two files according to GIT. warning: too many files, skipping inexact rename detection CONFLICT (delete/modify): test-recommendation-result.php deleted in HEAD and modified in [Bug] Fix test recommender. Version [Bug] Fix test recommender of test-recommendation-result.php left in tree. CONFLICT (delete/modify): test-recommendation.php deleted in

问题 I think I squashed the last 40 commits using rebase. I was following this guide to make sure I didn't do anything stupid - http://gitready.com/advanced/2009/02/10/squashing-commits-with-rebase.html The problem is, I think I did something stupid. The (interactive) text file couldn't be saved, so it seems that the rebase failed but the message it gave and some other things below suggest it might have worked. Not sure where I am or what to do (or even what my name is). Here's what I did: I typed

问题 The interactive rebase capabilities of Sourcetree are great, but I often find myself wanting to be able to "split" a commit into multiple smaller commits. I know theres a way to do this from the command line, but I can't seem to find any place in the UI to handle this. Is there a way to do this with Sourcetree? Or is this one of those places where I have to drop down to the command line to accomplish my goals? 回答1: Splitting the commits from the command line using interactive rebase is

问题 As part our rebase-heavy workflow, I am hoping to use a merge on the master branch. In particular I want to merge only when the topic branch has been rebased onto the most recent master commit thereby making any merge a fast-forward one. I can achieve that by using: git merge --ff-only Furthermore, I would like to record the integration of the topic branch with an empty commit which is why I would like to use --no-ff which forces that behaviour: git merge --no-ff What I really want, though,

问题 I find this way easier to merge branches and less conflicts: Copy trunk to a new branch, merge it with feature branch/s. When things done, merge the new branch back to the trunk. This technique is quite like the mercurial and git rebasing. I used to merge whatever changs from trunk to feature branche/s. But later when I merged the feature branch back to trunk, some of the stuff from trunk would be merged back again to the trunk, which caused a lot of conflicts. There is a choise of

问题 Is there a way to rebase a single commit from a branch onto another branch? I have this branch structure: -- -- -- -- -- (Master) \ -- -- -- -- -- XX (Feature-branch) All I want to do is to rebase the last commit of Feature-branch onto master and rollback Feature-branch one commit. -- -- -- -- -- XX (Master) \ -- -- -- -- -- (Feature-branch) How do I do that? 回答1: You can cherry-pick XX to master. git checkout master git cherry-pick <commit ID of XX> And remove the last commit from the

问题 Okay. If I'm on a branch (say working ), and I want to merge in the changes from another branch (say master ), then I run the command git-merge master while on the working branch, and the changes get merged in without rebasing the history at all. If I run git-rebase master , then the changes in master are rebased to be put on the top of my working branch. But what if I want to merge in the changes from master but rebase my changes in working to be on top? How do I do that? Can it be done? I

问题 I have a local branch for day-to-day dev work in git. My workflow is: Do stuff on local_branch, commit Fetch origin/master Rebase local_branch to catch up with new stuff from origin/master It all works fine, however most of the recommendations I encountered say that one should not "push" private branches, on which rebase is regularly performed. The problem here is that in this case local branch is not backed up to a server and the only way to save the work is to merge it back to "pushable"

问题 I have been using Merging heavily on master branch. But recently for a feature development in my situation merging seemed complicated for the project history. I came across Rebasing which solves my problem. I also came across the golden rule of rebasing while solving the problem. I also used Stashing at times, it worked, but I feel like the same thing could have been achieved with merging as well. Although I use these commands, I feel like if someone can explain the conceptually outstanding

问题 In our team, the regular procedure is that when we have a significant feature we work on a feature branch. Every now and then - we merge from master to out feature branch and when we're ready - we merge back to master (usually through a pull request). The problem is that as after the merge the commits history are mixed - we don't have a simple way to role back the branch-merging operation, to exclude the branch in case we find it problematic. We were considering a few alternatives: instead of