My master branch is so different than my development branch that I would like it to just become my master branch without having t开发者_JAVA技巧o do a merge, is this possible?Seems like I could walk i
I\'ve used git-blame to find a particular commit. Now I want to find the branch that it originally came from. (From there, I\'ll use the 开发者_开发问答branch name to find the particular ticket)
I really like git.At least, I like the idea of git.Being able to checkout my master project as a separate branch where I can change whatever I want without risk of screwing everything else up is aweso
New to git. A bit confused about how some of it works, conceptually. So it sounds like, in terms of local work, its a good idea to have a branch that contains only what goes into production and anot
I have two branches: master and dev I want to create a "feature branch" from the dev branch.
I would like to force other team-members to not work on the master-branch but on a development branch. we have a central git-repository where we push our work into. i would like to know if it\'s possi
The situation: Starting with the Master at A I branched and made some changes at B then merged that branch back in (C). After making some more changes I was at D but found I needed to deploy the code
Say I currently have the following in git: master O o<-- commit objects on master branch o -- O<-- new branch: featureX
I have had this happen to me often. I am working on a master branch and I need to test a plugin, so I create a new branch and check it out. I download the plugin into the project directory and test it
A while back I asked our developers to use rebase instead of merge before pushing. Eliminating trivial merges makes for a much easier to follow commit graph (ie: gitk, git log).
加载中,请稍侯......