GIT MERGE MASTER INTO BRANCH ONLY SEE DIFF WITH MASTER CODE
As teams grow sometimes you need to take pull requests a step further to really make sure code is ready to be merged into the family jewel: the master branch. Pull requests in particular provide a way to do peer code reviews and merges as part of a branch-based development workflow. No one intends to ship a bug to a customer on purpose, so having a mechanism in place to catch these subtle bugs is essential to a development team. Code review has been around in some form since the dawn of version control to help keep a close eye on the master branch and ensure code quality is high. Preserves complete history and chronological order.Your master branch represents the code that you will ship to your customers, and should be protected at all costs.As an extra merge commit is created every time, it causes commit history to look confusing & dirty.Risky if not used properly as it doesn’t preserve history.Avoid merging commit noise in repositories with busy branches.Conclusionīoth commands are very useful however, in different situations, each side has advantages as below. As rebase doesn’t create a merge commit, you don’t get the traceability of when two branches merged since rebase generates a linear branch at the end of the process. The disadvantage of this approach is that rebase changes the entire structure of the branches involved, including rewriting the commit history of these branches. By merging, it also doesn’t generate that additional strange merge commit. In the following illustration, If you have a commit D and a commit F in different branches and mix the branches ( via git merge) the result is a commit G whose parents are B and E.Ī - B - C - D- (operation rebase )- E-F ← masterįrom the illustration above, it is visible that something nice that rebase does is produce a linear, cleaner, and easier to read commit history. Git can achieve the merge by making a new additional commit that has multiple parents. This also means that merge manipulates multiple branches. Git achieves this what is known as a merge commit. The merge aims to consolidate feature and master branches to the commit that keeps the content of all the involved branches. Let’s understand both ways in detail : Merge a Branch Into Master With the merge Method in Git Git rebase is yet another command used for essentially the same purpose, except that it does it very differently. It allows developers to take their independent lines of code from the feature branch and integrate them into a single branch on master via the git merge tool. Git merge is a command that commits changes to another branch. With Git, we have two possibilities to merge our feature branch changes with the remote master branch: In this example following text content is added to file1.txt & file 2.txt, respectively. Next, add two files on the Master branch using the Add file button on the repository page. Prerequisites Create a Repository on GitHubĪn initial repository can be created as introduced in Github Let’s start the demonstration of the merging of two branches with a real example. In the end, if a feature or bug is approved, it will be merged to master. The main branch is the master branch which contains production code, and the second branch is where modifications will be executed, or new features will be implemented. In our tutorial for simplicity, let’s consider that there are two branches, the master branch and the feature branch known as feature-1. Therefore, the goal is not to make the modifications directly on this branch but to make them on other branches, and after various tests, integrate them on the master branch. It is on these branches that all the magic of GIT rests! The master branch will carry all the modifications made. The main advantage of git is its branching system.
0 kommentar(er)
