Re: master and origin

["Paolo Ciarrocchi" <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com>]

On 10/29/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> 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.