On 10/29/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> There is still one thing I don't understand, if I pull the git or > kernel repository all the local branches are updated according to the > remote branches, right? If I'm hacking on master what will happen to > my local changes? With the default setup (git clone without --use-separate-remote), then all local branches are updated according to remote branches... with the exception of remote 'master' branch which updates local 'origin' branch.
OK, I see.
pull = fetch + merge, so if you pull when you are on your local 'master' branch (and 'master' branch is first in the .git/remotes/origin file I think) you would fetch remote 'master' into local 'origin' and merge what you have in 'origin' into your 'master' (or merge remote 'master' into your local 'master' if you want to think like that).
So in this case, there is a difference between doing my local development under master or myownlocalbranch. Right? I mean, if I do my own development under master and I pull, the master branch will include origin and my local changes. Corret? While if I work in my local branch the datas are not modified with a pull, because pull will update only the local copy of the remote branch. Correct?
If you have uncommitted changes git would probably refuse the merge. If you made changes to one of the tracking branches (e.g. 'next' or 'origin'), git would refuse to fetch into this branch (unless forced). HTH
It does, a lot! Ciao, -- Paolo http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dhbdhs7d_4hsxqc8 Non credo nelle otto del mattino. Però esistono. Le otto del mattino sono l'incontrovertibile prova della presenza del male nel mondo. Gli ultimi giorni, Andrew Masterson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html